Guideline No. 445: Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for the management of chronic pelvic pain in females. TARGET POPULATION: This guideline is specific to pelvic pain in adolescent and adult females and excluded literature that looked at pelvic pain in males. It also did not address genital pain. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: The intent is to benefit patients with chronic pelvic pain by providing an evidence-based approach to management. Access to certain interventions such as physiotherapy and psychological treatments, and to interdisciplinary care overall, may be limited by costs and service availability. EVIDENCE: Medline and the Cochrane Database from 1990 to 2020 were searched for articles in English on subjects related to chronic pelvic pain, including diagnosis, overlapping pain conditions, central sensitization, management, medications, surgery, physiotherapy, psychological therapies, alternative and complementary therapies, and multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary care. The committee reviewed the literature and available data and used a consensus approach to develop recommendations. Only articles in English and pertaining to female subjects were included. VALIDATION METHODS: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: Family physicians, gynaecologists, urologists, pain specialists, physiotherapists, and mental health professionals. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Management of chronic pelvic pain should consider multifactorial contributors, including underlying central sensitization/nociplastic pain, and employ an interdisciplinary biopsychosocial approach that includes pain education, physiotherapy, and psychological & medical treatments. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Technicity in Canada: A Nationwide Whole-Population Analysis of Temporal Trends and Variation in Minimally Invasive Hysterectomies.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to provide a contemporary description of hysterectomy practice and temporal trends in Canada. DESIGN: A national whole-population retrospective analysis of data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. SETTING: Canada. PATIENTS: All women who underwent hysterectomy for benign indication from April 1, 2007, to March 31, 2017, in Canada. INTERVENTIONS: Hysterectomy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 369 520 hysterectomies were performed in Canada during the 10-year period, during which the hysterectomy rate decreased from 313 to 243 per 100 000 women. The proportion of abdominal hysterectomies decreased (59.5% to 36.9%), laparoscopic hysterectomies increased (10.8% to 38.6%), and vaginal hysterectomies decreased (29.7% to 24.5%), whereas the national technicity index increased from 40.5% to 63.1% (p <.001, all trends). The median length of stay decreased from 3 (interquartile range 2-4) days to 2 (interquartile range 1-3), and the proportion of patients discharged within 24 hours increased from 2.1% to 7.2%. In year 2016-17, women aged 40 to 49 years had significantly increased risk of abdominal hysterectomy compared with women undergoing hysterectomy in other age categories (p <.001). Comparing women with menstrual bleeding disorders, women undergoing hysterectomy for endometriosis (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-1.44) and myomas (aRR 2.01; 95% CI, 1.94-2.08) were at increased risk of abdominal hysterectomy, whereas women undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic pain (aRR 1.47; 95% CI, 1.41-1.53) were at decreased risk. Using Ontario as the comparator, Nova Scotia (aRR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.27-1.43), New Brunswick (aRR 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.32]), Manitoba (aRR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.28-1.43), and Newfoundland and Labrador (aRR 1.18; 95% CI, 1.10-1.27) had significantly higher risks of abdominal hysterectomy. In contrast, Saskatchewan (aRR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.77) and British Columbia (aRR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88) had significantly lower risks, whereas Prince Edward Island, Quebec, and Alberta were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The proportion of minimally invasive hysterectomies for benign indication has increased significantly in Canada. The declining use of vaginal approaches and the variation among provinces are of concern and necessitate further study.

Diagnosis of adverse events after hysterectomy with postoperative self-care web applications: A pilot study.

Increased pressures from multiple sources are leading to earlier patient discharge following surgery. Our objective was to test the feasibility of self-care web applications to inform women if, when, and where to seek help for symptoms after hysterectomy. We asked 31 women recovering at home after hysterectomy at two centers to sign into a website on a schedule. For each session, the website informed them about normal postoperative symptoms and prompted them to complete an interactive symptom questionnaire that provided detailed information on flagged responses. We interviewed eight women who experienced an adverse event. Six of these women had used the web application regularly, each indicating they used the information to guide them in seeking care for their complications. These data support that self-care applications may empower patients to manage their own care and present to appropriate health care providers and venues when they experience abnormal symptoms.

A pilot feasibility multicenter study of patients after excision of endometriosis.

OBJECTIVE: To serve as a pilot feasibility study for a randomized study of excision versus ablation in the treatment of endometriosis by (1) estimating the magnitude of change in symptoms after excision only at multiple referral centers and (2) determining the proportion of women willing to participate in a randomized trial. METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective study of women undergoing excision for endometriosis (Canadian Task Force class II-3) at Duke University Center for Endometriosis Research & Treatment (currently the Saint Louis University Center for Endometriosis), Center for Endometriosis Care, Northshore University Health System, Memorial University (Canada), and Florida Hospital. The study comprised 100 female patients, aged 18 to 55 years, with endometriosis-suspected pelvic pain. The intervention was laparoscopic excision only of the abnormal peritoneum suspicious for endometriosis. The main outcome measures were quality of life, pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and bowel and bladder symptoms. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 8.5 months. Excision of endometriosis showed a significant reduction in all pain scores except bowel symptoms, as well as significant improvement in quality of life. Of the patients, 84% were willing to participate in a randomized study. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life is a needed primary outcome for any randomized study comparing excision versus ablation. A multicenter comparative trial is feasible, although quality assurance would have to be addressed. Patients were willing to be randomized even at surgical referral centers.

A national survey of endoscopic practice among gynaecologists in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the current status of endoscopic gynaecological surgery in Canada, as well as the attitudes, perceptions, and educational preferences regarding endoscopy among Canadian obstetrician-gynaecologists. METHODS: An electronic online survey was sent to 630 obstetrician-gynaecologists in Canada through the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada electronic mailing list. Survey respondents were asked about demographic variables, level of training and current practice of endoscopic procedures, reasons for and barriers to performing endoscopy, and interest in continuing surgical education in laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. RESULTS: A total of 178 responses (28.3%) were collected and 152 (85.4%) analyzed. The majority of respondents were general obstetrician-gynaecologists (78.0%). More gynaecologic surgeons performed abdominal (92.7%) and vaginal hysterectomies (89.7%) than laparoscopic (68.4%) and robotic hysterectomies (2.2%). Even though 93.2% of respondents selected the endoscopic approach as the preferred approach to surgery for their patients, 38.7% of respondents did not feel that they had adequate training during residency to perform endoscopy. Lack of operating room resources and lack of time and opportunity for further training were frequently selected as major barriers to performing endoscopy. Participants identified weekend continuing medical education courses and trained endoscopic surgeon outreach as preferred methods of acquiring endoscopic skills. CONCLUSION: This survey provides a contemporary assessment of the current endoscopic practice patterns of Canadian obstetrician-gynaecologists, and it helps to identify some potentially modifiable factors hindering the practice of endoscopy and some possible solutions to overcoming these barriers.