Hysteroscopy needs of indigenous communities in Northern Quebec: a retrospective cohort study

We aimed to determine the surgical output for patients from Nunavik undergoing transfer to an urban centre for hysteroscopy, and associated costs. We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients from the 14 villages of Nunavik transferred for hysteroscopic surgery from 2016 to 2021. Diagnoses, surgical intervention, and nature of the procedure were all extracted from the patient charts, and costs/length of stay obtained from logisticians and administrators servicing the Nunavik region. Over a 5-year period, 22 patients were transferred from Nunavik for hysteroscopy, of which all were elective save one. The most common diagnosis was endometrial or cervical polyp and the most common procedure was diagnostic hysteroscopy. The average cost for patient transfer and lodging to undergo hysteroscopy in Montreal ranged from $6,000 to $15,000 CDN. On average, 4-5 patient transfers occur annually for hysteroscopy, most commonly for management of endometrial polyps, at a cost of $6,000 to $15,000 CDN, suggesting the need to investigate local capacity building in Nunavik and assess cost-effectiveness.

Is outpatient hysteroscopy the new gold standard? Results from an 11 year prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

In Australia, gynaecologists continue to investigate women with abnormal bleeding and suspected intrauterine pathology with inpatient hysteroscopy despite some evidence in the literature that that there is no difference in safety and outcome when compared to an outpatient procedure.

AIMS

This prospective study assessed the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of outpatient hysteroscopy over 11 years at a tertiary hospital in Australia. Resource savings were then calculated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective database was analysed from March 2003 to January 2014 (130 months, 990 women).

RESULTS

Successful hysteroscopic access was obtained in 94% of cases. Twenty-six percent of patients required a second procedure, including 132 for endometrial polyps and 33 for submucosal fibroids that were not able to be treated in the outpatient setting. On questioning, 88% of women would be happy to have the procedure again. Factors affecting success were pre-procedure pain, menopausal status and previous vaginal delivery. The difference between pain experienced versus pain expected was a major factor in patient acceptability. A vasovagal episode occurred in 5% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient hysteroscopy was demonstrated to be safe, effective and acceptable to women. Provision of an outpatient hysteroscopy service saves theatre time and approximately $1000 per case. Improved techniques and technology will allow progression to a 'see and treat' service, providing further savings. With budget constraints, increasing wait times for major procedures and concerns about trainee surgical experience, an outpatient hysteroscopy service should be considered the 'gold standard' investigation over hysteroscopy in theatre.

Does duration of hysteroscopy increase the risk of disease recurrence in patients with endometrial cancer? A multi-centre trial

Women with endometrial cancer often undergo hysteroscopy during their diagnostic work-up. Whether or not the duration of hysteroscopy affects the rate of positive peritoneal cells and the duration of recurrence-free survival is unknown. In a retrospective multi-centre study, the records of 552 patients with endometrial cancer were investigated. Duration of hysteroscopy was correlated with clinicopathological parameters and patient survival data. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] duration of hysteroscopy was 18.2 (10.5) min in the study population and 17.9 (10.1) min and 17.9 (10.2) min in patients with positive (n=109) and negative peritoneal cytology (n=443), respectively (p=0.9). There were no statistically significant correlations between duration of hysteroscopy and positive peritoneal cytology (p=0.6; rho=-0.028), FIGO stage (p=0.2; rho=-0.080), lymph node involvement (p=0.2; rho=0.106) and patient age (p=0.5; rho=0.033). Longer duration of hysteroscopy (>15 min) was not associated with positive peritoneal cytology (yes vs. no, p=0.8), advanced tumour stage (FIGO I vs. II, III and IV, p=0.3), lymph node involvement (yes vs. no, p=0.1) and patient age (≤65 vs. >65 years, p=0.4). In a multivariate analysis, FIGO stage [p<0.0001; hazard ratio (HR)=5.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5-10.2], lymph node involvement (p=0.02; HR=3.2, 95% CI 1.2-8.8) and patient age (p=0.003; HR=2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.2), but not duration of hysteroscopy (p=0.4; HR=1.2, 95% CI 0.7-2.2), were associated with recurrence-free survival. We conclude that longer duration of hysteroscopy does not increase the risk of positive peritoneal cytology and it is not an adverse prognostic factor for recurrence-free survival in patients with endometrial cancer.

Hysteroscopy and removal of endometrial polyps: A Dutch survey

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate current practice of Dutch gynecologists in polyp removal.

STUDY DESIGN

All practicing gynecologists in The Netherlands in 2003 were surveyed by a mailed self-administered questionnaire about polypectomy. Gynecologists were asked about their individual performance of polypectomy: setting, form of anesthesia, method and instrument used.

RESULTS

The response rate was 74% (553 of 752 gynecologists). Among the respondents, 455 (83%) stated that they removed polyps themselves. Polyps were most commonly removed in an inpatient setting (71%), under general or regional anesthesia (77%), and under direct hysteroscopic visualization (69%). Gynecologists working in a teaching hospital removed polyps more often in an outpatient setting compared to gynecologists working in a non-teaching hospital (93 (39%) versus 36 (19%) p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In the Netherlands, outpatient polyp removal is not practiced on a large scale. However, teaching hospitals are more often performing polypectomy in an outpatient setting. Therefore, we expect that there must be a tendency towards outpatient hysteroscopic removal of polyps for the future. Further research is required to assess the efficacy polyp removal.

Standard setting for outpatient gynaecology procedures: A multidisciplinary framework for implementation

This chapter describes the changing cultural background of health care from which any service is delivered. In particular, the authors hope to outline cultural, educational, technical and environmental changes that have been used as opportunities to develop a quality-assessed outpatient hysteroscopic service. Examined within the chapter will be the roles and limitations of evaluation and audit, research and the multidisciplinary team. The importance of process, relationships and collaborative working within organizations will be explored, and outpatient hysteroscopy will be used as a working example of how these inform a model of practice development.

Delivering an effective outpatient service in gynaecology. A randomised controlled trial analysing the cost of outpatient versus daycase hysteroscopy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the cost implications of outpatient versus daycase hysteroscopy to the National Health Service, the patient and their employer.

DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

The gynaecology clinic of a large teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-seven women with abnormal uterine bleeding requiring investigation.

METHODS

Women were randomly allocated to either outpatient or daycase hysteroscopy. They were asked to complete diaries recording expenses and time off work. The National Health Service costs were calculated for a standard outpatient and daycase hysteroscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Costs to the National Health Service, costs to the employer, loss of income, childcare costs and travel expenses.

RESULTS

The outpatient group required significantly less time off work compared with the daycase group (0.8 days vs 3.3 days), P < 0.001. Of those women who lost income due to the hysteroscopy, the average loss of income was twice as much in the daycase group ( pound 20.40 in the outpatient group vs pound 50.60 in the daycase group). The average cost of childcare required to cover the time spent in hospital undergoing the hysteroscopy was similar in both groups, however, the number of women requiring childcare was small. Travel costs incurred by the women were 74% more in the daycase group compared with the outpatient group-with an average cost of pound 3.46 in the outpatient group and pound 6.02 in the daycase group. Daycase hysteroscopy costs the National Health Service approximately pound 53.88 more per patient, than performing an outpatient hysteroscopy. Purchasing the hysteroscopes necessary to perform an outpatient hysteroscopy is a more expensive outlay than those required for daycase hysteroscopy. However, there are so many other savings that only 38 patients need to undergo outpatient hysteroscopy (even with a 4% failure rate) rather than daycase hysteroscopy in order to recoup the extra money required to set up an outpatient hysteroscopy service.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient hysteroscopy offers many benefits over its traditional counterpart including faster recovery, less time away from work and home and cost savings to the woman and her employer and the National Health Service. Resources need to be made available to rapidly develop this service across the UK in order to better serve both patient and taxpayer.