Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T08:59:42.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

What Determines the Choice of Procedure in Stress Incontinence Surgery?: The Use of Multilevel Modeling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Joanne M. Griffiths
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Nicholas A. Black
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Catherine Pope
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Jenny Stanley
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Ann Bowling
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Paul D. Abel
Affiliation:
Royal Postgraduate Medical School

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of choice of surgical procedure (anterior colporrhaphy, colposuspension, or needle suspension) to treat stress incontinence in women. We used multilevel modeling of data on 271 patients in 18 hospitals in England in 1993–94. Patient-related factors included sociodemographic details, anatomical diagnosis, symptom severity, symptom impact, previous treatment, parity, comorbidity, and general health status. Surgeon-related factors were specialty, grade, and annual volume of procedures undertaken. Hospital teaching status was considered. Some patient-related factors were associated with choice of procedure: women with a concomitant genital prolapse, with a history of high parity, and with no previous nonsurgical treatment were more likely to undergo an anterior colporrhaphy than a colposuspension or needle suspension (although this finding could be confounded by surgical specialty). In addition, women were more likely to be treated by colposuspension if their surgeon specialized in incontinence surgery (measured by annual volume of cases). Finally, being treated by needle suspension depended on there being a consultant surgeon familiar with the procedure at the hospital attended. While choice of surgical procedure depends partly on the patient's anatomical diagnosis, it is also dependent on the specialty of the surgeon whom she consults and the hospital that she attends. This variability, in turn, could have implications for the patient (as the relative effectiveness of the different procedures is unknown) and for the purchasers of care (as the relative cost-effectiveness of procedures is also unknown).

Type
General Essays
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Agresti, A.Categorical data analysis. New York: John Wiley, 1990.Google Scholar
2.Black, N. A., & Downs, S. H.The effectiveness of surgery for stress incontinence: A systematic review. British Journal of Urology, 1996, 78, 497510.Google Scholar
3.Black, N. A., Griffiths, J. M., & Pope, C.Development of a symptom severity index and a symptom impact index for women with stress incontinence. Neurourology & Urodynamics, 1996, 15, 630–40.Google Scholar
4.Black, N. A., Griffiths, J. M., Pope, C., et al. Sociodemographic and symptomatic characteristics of women undergoing stress incontinence surgery in the UK. British Journal of Urology, 1996, 78, 847–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Breeze, E., Maidment, A., Bennett, N., et al. Health Survey for England 1992. London: HMSO, 1994.Google Scholar
6.Brocklehurst, J. C.Urinary incontinence in the community—Analysis of a MORI poll. British Medical Journal, 1993, 306, 832–34.Google Scholar
7.National Institutes of Health. Consensus development conference statement. Urinary incontinence in adults. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, 10 3–5,1988.Google Scholar
8.Rice, N., & Leyland, A. H.Multilevel models: Applications to health data. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 1996, 1, 154–64.Google Scholar
9.Royal College of Physicians Working Party on Incontinence. Incontinence: Causes, management and provision of services. London: Royal College of Physicians of London, 1995.Google Scholar
10.Woodhouse, G (ed.). A guide to MLn for new users. London: Institute of Education, University of London, 1995.Google Scholar