RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Many women experience bleeding disorders that may have an anatomical or unexplained origin. Although hysterectomy is the most definitive and common treatment, it is highly invasive and resource-intensive. Less invasive therapies are therefore advised before hysterectomy for women with fibroids or bleeding disorders. This study has two aims related to treating bleeding disorders and uterine fibroids in the Netherlands: (1) to evaluate the regional variations in prevalence and surgical approaches; and (2) to assess the associations between regional rates of hysterectomies and less invasive surgical techniques to analyze whether hysterectomy can be replaced in routine practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We completed a register-based study of claims data for bleeding disorders and fibroids in women between 2016 and 2020 using data from Statistics Netherlands for case-mix adjustment. Crude and case-mix adjusted regional hysterectomy rates were examined overall and by surgical approach. Coefficients of variation were used to measure regional variation and regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between hysterectomy and less invasive procedure rates across regions. RESULTS: Overall, 14 186 and 8821 hysterectomies were performed for bleeding disorders and fibroids, respectively. Laparoscopic approaches predominated (bleeding disorders 65%, fibroids 49%), followed by vaginal (bleeding disorders 24%, fibroids 5%) and abdominal (bleeding disorders 11%, fibroids 46%) approaches. Substantial regional differences were noted in both hysterectomy rates and the surgical approaches. For bleeding disorders, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with endometrial ablation rates (ß = 0.11; P = 0.21) and therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (ß = 0.14; P = 0.31). For fibroids, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (ß = 0.10; P = 0.34) and negatively associated with both embolization rates (ß = -0.08; P = 0.08) and myomectomy rates (ß = -0.03; P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Regional variation exists in the rates of hysterectomy and minimally invasive techniques. The absence of a significant substitution effect provides no clear evidence that minimally invasive techniques have replaced hysterectomy in clinical practice. However, although the result was not significant, embolization could be an exception based on its stronger negative association.
RESUMO
Research into the quality of cancer screening programs often lacks the perspective of clinicians, missing insights into the performance of individual hospitals. This retrospective cohort study aimed to identify guideline deviation (specifically, overtreatment and undertreatment) related to the cervical cancer screening program in Dutch hospitals by deterministically linking nationwide insurance data with pathology data for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). We then constructed quality indicators using the Dutch CIN guideline and National Health Care Institute recommendations to assess compliance with CIN management, treatment outcomes, and follow-up, using an empirical Bayes shrinkage model to correct for case-mix variation and hospitals with few observations. Data were linked for 115,899 of 125,751 (92%) eligible women. Overtreatment was observed in the see-and-treat approach (immediate treatment) for women with low-grade referral cytology (4%; hospital range, 0%-25%), CIN ≤ 1 treatment specimens (26%; hospital range, 10%-55%), and follow-up cervix cytology ≥2 months before the guideline recommendation after treatment for CIN 2 (2%; hospital range, 0%-9%) or CIN 3 (5%; hospital range, 0%-19%). By contrast, undertreatment was observed for treatment within 3 months after a CIN 3 biopsy result (90%; hospital range 59%-100%) and follow-up ≥2 months beyond the guideline recommendation after treatments for CIN 2 (21%, hospital range 7%-48%) and CIN 3 (20%, hospital range 7%-90%). In conclusion, we found evidence of CIN overtreatment and undertreatment in all measured domains at the hospital level. Guideline adherence could be improved by implementing the developed indicators in an audit and feedback instrument for use by healthcare professionals in routine practice.