Regional variation in health care substitution for intrauterine device insertion: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Rising health care costs are a major concern in most Western countries. The substitution of healthcare stands as a strategic approach aimed at mitigating costs while offering medical services in proximity to patients' residences. An illustrative instance involves the migration of outpatient hospital care to primary care settings. Notably, the insertion of intrauterine devices (IUDs) can be safely executed within primary care contexts. In order to establish a pragmatic objective for the rate of IUD substitution, we conducted an evaluation of regional disparities in healthcare substitution pertaining to the insertion of intrauterine devices. Furthermore, we investigated disparities in the follow-up ultrasound and reinsertion of IUDs between primary and secondary healthcare environments. METHODS: All women who underwent IUD insertion in Dutch primary care (by general practitioners and midwives) and secondary care (by hospital physicians) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020 were included. The main outcome measures were the case-mix adjusted IUD insertion rates at the regional level by care setting and the proportions requiring follow-up ultrasound and IUD reinsertion within three months. RESULTS: Of the 840,766 IUD placements, 74% were inserted in primary care and 26% in secondary care. The proportion inserted in primary care increased from 70% in 2016 to 77% in 2020. The observed substitution rate ranged from 58 to 82% between regions. Compared with health care professionals in primary care, those in secondary care performed more ultrasounds to verify IUD placement (23% vs. 3%; p-value < 0.01) and more IUD reinsertions within three months (6% vs. 2%; p-value < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: IUDs are increasingly being inserted in Dutch primary care, with peak regional IUD insertion care substitution rates at ≥ 80%. IUD insertion care substitution to primary care appears to be associated with significantly fewer women having follow-up ultrasound or IUD reinsertion within three months.

Regional practice variation in hysterectomy and the implementation of less invasive surgical procedures: A register-based study in the Netherlands.

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.

Practice variation in the stepped care approach to idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding: A population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) affects a quarter of all women, with half having no structural cause. Dutch guidelines recommend a stepped care approach to the management of such idiopathic HMB, starting with medication or a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD), before progressing to endometrial ablation, and ultimately, hysterectomy. However, practice variation between hospitals could lead to suboptimal health outcomes and increased healthcare costs for some women. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate adherence to stepped care for women with idiopathic HMB and to identify practice variation among Dutch hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: This population-based cross-sectional study used Dutch insurance claims data from primary and secondary care for all women with idiopathic HMB referred to a gynecologist between January 2019 and December 2020. We calculated the average number of treatments in the 3 years before each treatment step at each hospital, making adjustments for age, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. Variation in medical practice was measured by the coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: We studied 20,715 women treated with LNG-IUDs (56%), endometrial ablation (36%), laparoscopic hysterectomy (13%), or vaginal hysterectomy (4%) in 93 hospitals. Before endometrial ablation, on average 47% used medication (hospital range 27%-71%; CV 0.17) and 16% used an LNG-IUD (hospital range 8%-29%, CV 0.32). Before hysterectomy, 52% (hospital range 28%-65%, CV 0.16) used medication, 21% (hospital range 6%-38%, CV 0.35) used an LNG-IUD, and 23% underwent endometrial ablation (hospital range 0%-59%, CV 0.55). On average, women underwent 0.63 (hospital range 0.36-1.00, adjusted rate 0.40-0.98, CV 0.17) and 0.96 (hospital range 0.56-1.45, adjusted rate 0.56-1.44, CV 0.18) treatments before endometrial ablation and hysterectomy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable practice variation exists among Dutch hospitals in the stepped care approach to idiopathic HMB. Improving adherence to this approach could improve quality of care and reduce costs.

Identification of over- and undertreatment in the Dutch national cervical cancer screening program: A data linkage study at the hospital level.

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.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) for vaginal vault prolapse (VVP). METHODS: Long-term follow-up of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (SALTO trial). A total of 74 women were randomly assigned to LSC (n=37) or ASC (n=37). Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life, measured with validated questionnaires. Secondary outcomes included anatomical outcome, composite outcome of success, complications, and retreatment. RESULTS: We analyzed 22 patients in the LSC group and 19 patients in the ASC group for long-term follow-up, with a median follow-up of 109 months (9.1 years). Disease-specific quality of life did not differ after long-term follow-up with median scores of 0.0 (LSC: IQR 0-17; ASC: IQR 0-0) on the "genital prolapse" domain of the Urogenital Distress Inventory in both groups (p = 0.175). Anatomical outcomes were the same for both groups on all points of the POP-Q. The composite outcome of success for the apical compartment is 78.6% (n = 11) in the LSC group and 84.6% (n = 11) in the ASC group (p = 0.686). Mesh exposures occurred in 2 patients (12.5%) in the LSC group and 1 patient (7.7%) in the ASC group. There were 5 surgical reinterventions in both groups (LSC: 22.7%; ASC: 26.3%, p = 0.729). CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up no substantial differences in quality of life, anatomical results, complications, or reinterventions between LSC and ASC were observed. Therefore, the laparoscopic approach is preferable, considering the short-term advantages. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR6330, 18 January 2017, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5964.

Design characteristics of studies on medical practice variation of caesarean section rates: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Medical practice variation in caesarean section rates is the most studied type of practice variation in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology. This has not resulted in increased homogeneity of treatment between geographic areas or healthcare providers. Our study aim was to evaluate whether current study designs on medical practice variation of caesarean section rates were optimized to identify the unwarranted share of practice variation and could contribute to the reduction of unwarranted practice variation by meeting criteria for audit and feedback. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, EBSCO/CINAHL and Wiley/Cochrane Library from inception to March 24th, 2020. Studies that compared the rate of caesarean sections between individuals, institutions or geographic areas were included. Study design was assessed on: selection procedure of study population, data source, case-mix correction, patient preference, aggregation level of analysis, maternal and neonatal outcome, and determinants (professional and organizational characteristics). RESULTS: A total of 284 studies were included. Most studies (64%) measured the caesarean section rate in the entire study population instead of using a sample (30%). (National) databases were most often used as information source (57%). Case-mix correction was performed in 87 studies (31%). The Robson classification was used in 20% of the studies following its endorsement by the WHO in 2015. The most common levels of aggregation were hospital level (35%) and grouped hospitals (35%) e.g. private versus public. The percentage of studies that assessed the relationship between variation in caesarean section rates and maternal outcome was 9%, neonatal outcome 19%, determinants (professional and organizational characteristics) 21% and patient preference 2%. CONCLUSIONS: Study designs of practice variation in caesarean sections varied considerably, raising questions about their appropriateness. Studies focused on measuring practice variation, rather than contributing to the reduction of unwarranted practice variation. Future studies should correct for differences in patient characteristics (case-mix) and patient preference to identify unwarranted practice variation. Practice variation studies could be used for audit and feedback if results are presented at lower levels of aggregation, and appeal to intrinsic motivation of physicians, for example by including the health effects on mother and child.

[Translating care evaluations into practice: a suggestion based on the healthcare professional's intrinsic motivation to improve]. / Vertaling van zorgevaluaties naar de praktijk.

Scientific medical associations have made important steps in setting up integrated research agendas to narrow the huge knowledge gap about the effectiveness of accepted treatments. The ensuing care evaluations provide new insight into the value of different treatments; however, the implementation of the results of these care evaluations in practice continues to lag behind. In 2016 the Netherlands health insurers and the Netherlands patients' federation, supported by the Netherlands federation of medical specialists, started up the programme 'Leading the change'. As an integral part of this programme we held discussions with different parties to draw up measures to stimulate implementation. We advise having a comprehensive packet of measures to promote implementation. In this context it is important to make use of information-mirroring and to clarify the consequences of care evaluations for all parties involved. Implementation of new insights arising from care evaluations is in line with the responsibility associated with professional autonomy. Only if and when implementation lags behind despite stimulating measures will it be necessary to implement less voluntary measures.