Measuring the quality of care provided to women with pelvic organ prolapse

Vaginal Pessary Use and Management for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Developed by the joint writing group of the American Urogynecologic Society and the Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates. Individual writing group members are noted in the Acknowledgments section

ABSTRACT

Over the past 50 years, pessary use has increased in popularity and has become an essential pelvic organ prolapse (POP) management tool. However, evidence is lacking to define care standardization, including pessary fitting, routine maintenance, and management of pessary-related complications. This clinical consensus statement (CCS) on vaginal pessary use and management for POP reflects statements drafted by content experts from the American Urogynecologic Society and Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates. The purpose of this CCS is to identify areas of expert consensus and nonconsensus regarding pessary fitting, follow-up, and management of pessary complications to improve the safety and quality of care where evidence is currently limited. The American Urogynecologic Society and Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates' vaginal pessary for POP writing group used a modified Delphi process to assess statements that were evaluated for consensus after a structured literature search. A total of 31 statements were assessed and divided into 3 categories: (1) fitting and follow-up, (2) complications, and 3) quality of life. Of the 31 statements that were assessed, all statements reached consensus after 2 rounds of the Delphi survey. This CCS document hopefully serves as a first step toward standardization of pessary care, but the writing group acknowledges that improved research will grow the base of knowledge and evidence providing clinicians a foundation to manage pessary care effectively and confidently.

AUGS-PERFORM: A New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Assess Quality of Prolapse Care

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are important for measuring quality of care, particularly for interventions aimed at improving symptom bother such as procedures for pelvic organ prolapse. We aimed to create a concise yet comprehensive PRO measurement tool to assess pelvic organ prolapse care in high-volume clinical environments.

Methods

The relevant concepts to measure prolapse treatment quality were first established through literature review, qualitative interviews, and a patient and provider-driven consensus-building process. Extant items mapping to these concepts, or domains, were identified from an existing pool of patient-reported symptoms and condition-specific and generic health-related quality of life measures. Item classification was performed to group items assessing similar concepts while eliminating items that were redundant, inconsistent with domains, or overly complex. A consensus meeting was held in March 2020 where patient and provider working groups ranked the remaining candidate items in order of relevance to measure prolapse treatment quality. After subsequent expert review, the revised candidate items underwent cognitive interview testing and were further refined.

Results

Fifteen relevant PRO instruments were initially identified, and 358 items were considered for inclusion. After 2 iterative consensus reviews and 4 rounds of cognitive interviewing with 19 patients, 11 final candidate items were identified. These items map 5 consensus-based domains that include awareness and bother from prolapse, physical function, physical discomfort during sexual activity, pain, and urinary/defecatory symptoms.

Conclusions

We present a concise set of candidate items that were developed using rigorous patient-centered methodology and a national consensus process, including urogynecologic patients and providers.

Person-Centered Care for Patients with Pessaries

Pelvic organ prolapse is a common condition affecting women of any age but more likely to occur in the aging woman. Prolapse has a significant impact on quality of life, sexuality, and body image. Vaginal support pessaries have been used since ancient times and are a safe and effective nonsurgical treatment option. Fitting a pessary results in immediate symptom improvement. A comprehensive evaluation for pessary fitting is time intensive but necessary. Nurse providers perform direct pessary care and have a role in caring for women with prolapse expanding access to care. Caregiver and family involvement is important for pessary care and follow-up.

Impact of surgical training on the performance of proposed quality measures for hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse

BACKGROUND

Recent healthcare reform has led to increased emphasis on standardized provision of quality care. Use of government- and organization-approved quality measures is 1 way to document quality care. Quality measures, to improve care and aid in reimbursement, are being proposed and vetted in many areas of medicine.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess performance of proposed quality measures that pertain to hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse stratified by surgical training. The 4 quality measures that we assessed were (1) the documentation of offering conservative treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, (2) the quantitative assessment of pelvic organ prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse-Quantification or Baden-Walker), (3) the performance of an apical support procedure, and (4) the performance of cystoscopy at time of hysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse from January 1 to December 31, 2008, within a large healthcare maintenance organization were identified by diagnostic and procedural codes within the electronic medical record. Medical records were reviewed extensively for demographic and clinical data that included the performance of the 4 proposed quality measures and the training background of the primary surgeon (gynecologic generalist, fellowship-trained surgeon in Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, and "grandfathered" Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery). Data were analyzed with the use of descriptive statistics. Inferential statistics with chi-squared tests were used to compare performance rates of quality measures that were stratified by surgical training. Probability values <.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Six hundred thirty patients who underwent hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse in 2008 had complete records available for analysis. Fellowship-trained surgeons performed 302 hysterectomies for pelvic organ prolapse; grandfathered Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery surgeons performed 98 hysterectomies, and gynecologic generalist surgeons performed 230 hysterectomies. Fellowship-trained surgeons had the highest performance rates for individual quality measures (91.4-98.7%) and cumulative performance of all measures (80.8% of cases). Grandfathered Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery surgeons performed significantly fewer measures (80.6-95.9% performance rate for individual measures; 65.3% cumulatively for all measures) than fellowship-trained surgeons and more than gynecologic generalists (64.3-70% for individual measures; 29.1% cumulatively for all measures). There was an association between surgeon training background and number of hysterectomies performed for pelvic organ prolapse, with specialist surgeons performing more hysterectomies. When quality measure performance was stratified by surgeon volume, similar significant associations were found, with high-volume surgeons performing more quality measures than low-volume surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Within a large healthcare maintenance organization, fellowship-trained Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery surgeons were more likely to perform proposed quality measures in women who underwent hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse compared with those surgeons without such training. Grandfathered Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery surgeons performed measures more frequently than gynecologic generalists but less than fellowship-trained surgeons. Further study is indicated to correlate the proposed quality measures with clinical outcomes.

Surgical Updates in the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Pelvic organ prolapse affects approximately 8% of women, and the demand for pelvic organ prolapse surgery is expected to increase by nearly 50% over the next 40 years. The surgical techniques used to correct pelvic organ prolapse have evolved over the last 10 years, with multiple well-designed studies addressing the risks, outcomes, reoperation rates, and optimal surgical approaches. Here we review the most recent evidence on the route of access, concomitant procedures, and synthetic materials for augmenting the repair. Ultimately, this review highlights that there is no optimal method for correcting pelvic organ prolapse and that the risks, benefits, and approaches should be discussed in a patient-centered, goal-oriented approach to decision-making.

Rates of colpopexy and colporrhaphy at the time of hysterectomy for prolapse

BACKGROUND

It has been shown that addressing apical support at the time of hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) reduces recurrence and reoperation rates. In fact, national guidelines consider hysterectomy alone to be inadequate treatment for POP. Despite this, anterior and posterior colporrhaphy are frequently performed without a colpopexy procedure and hysterectomy alone is often utilized for treatment of prolapse.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to: (1) determine rates of concomitant procedures for POP in hysterectomies performed with POP as an indication, (2) identify factors associated with performance of a colpopexy at the time of hysterectomy for POP, and (3) identify the influence of surgical complexity on perioperative complication rates.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study of hysterectomies performed for POP from Jan. 1, 2013, through May 7, 2014, in a statewide surgical quality database. Patients were stratified based on procedures performed: hysterectomy alone, hysterectomy with colporrhaphy and without apical suspension, and hysterectomy with colpopexy with or without colporrhaphy. Demographics, medical history and intraoperative care, and perioperative care were compared between the groups. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to identify factors independently associated with use of colpopexy and factors associated with increased rates of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

POP was an indication in 1557 hysterectomies. Most hysterectomies were vaginal (59.6%), followed by laparoscopic or robotic (34.1%), and abdominal (6.2%). Hysterectomy alone was performed in 43.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40.6-45.6) of cases, 32.8% (95% CI, 30.4-35.1) had a colporrhaphy without colpopexy, and 24.1% (95% CI, 22-26.3) had a colpopexy with or without colporrhaphy. Use of colpopexy was independently associated with patient age >40 years, POP as the only indication for surgery (odd ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.185-2.230), laparoscopic surgery (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.860-5.153), and a surgeon specializing in urogynecology (OR, 8.2; 95% CI, 5.156-12.923). The overall perioperative complication rate was 6.6%, with the majority being considered minor. Complications were more likely when the procedure was performed with an abdominal approach (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.088-4.686), with the use of a colpopexy procedure (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.840-5.194), and by a surgeon specializing in urogynecology (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.144-4.315).

CONCLUSION

Colpopexy and colporrhaphy may be underutilized and are potential targets for quality improvement. Performance of additional procedures at the time of hysterectomy increased the rate of perioperative complications. Long-term consequences of these surgical practices deserve additional study.

Concomitant apical suspensory procedures in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse in the United States in 2011

INTRODUCTION

Although the surgical restoration of apical support has been shown to decrease reoperation rates, it is unclear whether this has been incorporated into current practice. The aims of this study were to determine the rate of concomitant apical suspensory procedures in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse undergoing surgical repair in 2011 and to identify associated factors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample for women with a primary diagnosis of cystocele who underwent prolapse repair in 2011. The study cohort was analyzed for demographics, concomitant procedures, and hospital characteristics. The rate of apical suspensory procedures was determined. Factors potentially associated with receiving concomitant apical suspensory procedure were evaluated using univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 2,900 women in the database had a primary diagnosis of cystocele and underwent surgical prolapse repair in 2011. 925 (31.9 %) subjects underwent a concomitant apical suspensory procedure. The mean age in the study cohort was 61.9 ± 12.8 years. Hysterectomies were performed in 11.1 % of subjects. 61.1 % were performed vaginally, 26.5 % laparoscopically, and 12.5 % abdominally. On multivariate analysis, age greater than 50 years, Caucasian race, concomitant hysterectomy, and an urban teaching hospital setting were independently associated with receiving concomitant apical suspensory procedure in 2011.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evidence that the restoration of apical support is important for optimal anterior support, the overall rate of concomitant apical suspensory procedures is low. Several factors may play a role in whether or not women receive an apical suspensory procedure. This study highlights opportunities to improve the quality of surgical care provided to women with anterior vaginal prolapse.