Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 11/2013

01-11-2013 | Original Article

Improving the accuracy of prolapse and incontinence procedure epidemiology by utilizing both inpatient and outpatient data

Authors: Christopher S. Elliott, Kim F. Rhoads, Craig V. Comiter, Bertha Chen, Eric R. Sokol

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 11/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The epidemiologic description of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) procedures is documented in several large studies using national database cohorts. These studies, however, may underestimate the number of procedures performed because they only capture procedures performed in either the inpatient or outpatient settings alone. We present a complete annual description of all inpatient and outpatient surgeries for POP and SUI in California.

Methods

We reviewed a record of all inpatient and outpatient POP and SUI surgeries performed in California in 2008 using data from the Office of Statewide Health Planning (OSHPD).

Results

In 2008, 20,004 and 20,330 women in California underwent POP and SUI procedures, respectively. Of these, 3,134 (15.6 %) and 9,016 (44.3 %) were performed in an outpatient setting. The age-adjusted rates of POP and SUI were 1.20 and 1.20 per 1,000 US females, respectively. This correlates to 186,000 POP and 186,000 SUI procedures per year nationally. Vaginal apical suspensions were more common in those undergoing surgery as an inpatient (45.1 vs 19.4 %). The use of mesh to augment prolapse repairs was similar (22.3 % inpatient vs 19.3 % outpatient). SUI procedures performed in the outpatient setting were more likely to be performed as stand-alone procedures (82.9 vs 18.8 %, respectively).

Conclusions

In California, 16 % of POP and 44 % of SUI procedures were performed in an outpatient surgical setting in 2008. Epidemiologic studies of POP and SUI should account for the fact that a substantial number of repairs are performed in the outpatient setting in order to achieve accuracy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Erekson EA, Lopes VV, Raker CA et al (2010) Ambulatory procedures for female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:497.e1–497.e5CrossRef Erekson EA, Lopes VV, Raker CA et al (2010) Ambulatory procedures for female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:497.e1–497.e5CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Jones KA, Shepherd JP, Oliphant SS et al (2010) Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979–2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202:501.e1–501.e7CrossRef Jones KA, Shepherd JP, Oliphant SS et al (2010) Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979–2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202:501.e1–501.e7CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Shah AD, Kohli N, Rajan SS et al (2008) The age distribution, rates, and types of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in the USA. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:421–428PubMedCrossRef Shah AD, Kohli N, Rajan SS et al (2008) The age distribution, rates, and types of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in the USA. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:421–428PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2003) Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979–1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:108–115PubMedCrossRef Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2003) Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979–1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:108–115PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Brown JS, Waetjen LE, Subak LL et al (2002) Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:712–716PubMedCrossRef Brown JS, Waetjen LE, Subak LL et al (2002) Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:712–716PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Wu JM, Gandhi MP, Shah AD et al (2011) Trends in inpatient urinary incontinence surgery in the USA, 1998–2007. Int Urogynecol J 22:1437–1443PubMedCrossRef Wu JM, Gandhi MP, Shah AD et al (2011) Trends in inpatient urinary incontinence surgery in the USA, 1998–2007. Int Urogynecol J 22:1437–1443PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Oliphant SS, Wang L, Bunker CH et al (2009) Trends in stress urinary incontinence inpatient procedures in the United States, 1979–2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200:521.e1–521.e6CrossRef Oliphant SS, Wang L, Bunker CH et al (2009) Trends in stress urinary incontinence inpatient procedures in the United States, 1979–2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200:521.e1–521.e6CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2004) Ambulatory procedures for urinary incontinence in the United States, 1994–1996. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:33–36PubMedCrossRef Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2004) Ambulatory procedures for urinary incontinence in the United States, 1994–1996. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:33–36PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2003) Procedures for urinary incontinence in the United States, 1979–1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:70–75PubMedCrossRef Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L (2003) Procedures for urinary incontinence in the United States, 1979–1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:70–75PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF et al (2011) Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:230.e1–230.e5CrossRef Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF et al (2011) Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:230.e1–230.e5CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Klein RJ, Schoenborn CA (2001) Age adjustment using the 2000 projected U.S. population. Healthy People 2010 Stat Notes 20:1–10 Klein RJ, Schoenborn CA (2001) Age adjustment using the 2000 projected U.S. population. Healthy People 2010 Stat Notes 20:1–10
16.
go back to reference ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins–Gynecology (2007) ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 85: pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 110:717–729CrossRef ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins–Gynecology (2007) ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 85: pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 110:717–729CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Rhoads KF, Sokol ER (2011) Variation in the quality of surgical care for uterovaginal prolapse. Med Care 49:46–51PubMedCrossRef Rhoads KF, Sokol ER (2011) Variation in the quality of surgical care for uterovaginal prolapse. Med Care 49:46–51PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Summers A, Winkel LA, Hussain HK et al (2006) The relationship between anterior and apical compartment support. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:1438–1443PubMedCrossRef Summers A, Winkel LA, Hussain HK et al (2006) The relationship between anterior and apical compartment support. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:1438–1443PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Rooney K, Kenton K, Mueller ER et al (2006) Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1837–1840PubMedCrossRef Rooney K, Kenton K, Mueller ER et al (2006) Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1837–1840PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lowder JL, Park AJ, Ellison R et al (2008) The role of apical vaginal support in the appearance of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 111:152–157PubMedCrossRef Lowder JL, Park AJ, Ellison R et al (2008) The role of apical vaginal support in the appearance of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 111:152–157PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Elliott CS, Yeh J, Comiter CV et al (2013) The predictive value of a cystocele for concomitant vaginal apical prolapse. J Urol 189:200–203PubMedCrossRef Elliott CS, Yeh J, Comiter CV et al (2013) The predictive value of a cystocele for concomitant vaginal apical prolapse. J Urol 189:200–203PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Rogo-Gupta L, Rodriguez LV, Litwin MS et al (2012) Trends in surgical mesh use for pelvic organ prolapse from 2000 to 2010. Obstet Gynecol 120:1105–1115PubMed Rogo-Gupta L, Rodriguez LV, Litwin MS et al (2012) Trends in surgical mesh use for pelvic organ prolapse from 2000 to 2010. Obstet Gynecol 120:1105–1115PubMed
23.
go back to reference Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Sokol ER et al (2010) Vaginal mesh for prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 116:293–303PubMedCrossRef Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Sokol ER et al (2010) Vaginal mesh for prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 116:293–303PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Paraiso MF, Barber MD, Muir TW et al (2006) Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1762–1771PubMedCrossRef Paraiso MF, Barber MD, Muir TW et al (2006) Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1762–1771PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Milani R, Salvatore S, Soligo M et al (2005) Functional and anatomical outcome of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse repair with prolene mesh. BJOG 112:107–111PubMedCrossRef Milani R, Salvatore S, Soligo M et al (2005) Functional and anatomical outcome of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse repair with prolene mesh. BJOG 112:107–111PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Improving the accuracy of prolapse and incontinence procedure epidemiology by utilizing both inpatient and outpatient data
Authors
Christopher S. Elliott
Kim F. Rhoads
Craig V. Comiter
Bertha Chen
Eric R. Sokol
Publication date
01-11-2013
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 11/2013
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2113-z

Other articles of this Issue 11/2013

International Urogynecology Journal 11/2013 Go to the issue