Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Manchester-Fothergill procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension: an activity-based costing analysis

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Surgical treatment of primary uterine prolapse: a comparison of vaginal native tissue surgical techniques

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Comments on Letter to the Editor: prolapse reduction deteriorates the urethral closure mechanism

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKommentar/debatForskningpeer review

  3. Prolapse reduction deteriorates the urethral closure mechanism

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. A Danish national population-based cohort study of synthetic midurethral slings, 2007-2011

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Native tissue repair is cost-effective in primary anterior POP

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKommentar/debatForskningpeer review

  2. Surgical treatment of primary uterine prolapse: a comparison of vaginal native tissue surgical techniques

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common diagnosis that imposes high and ever-growing costs to the healthcare economy. Numerous surgical techniques for the treatment of POP exist, but there is no consensus about which is the ideal technique for treating apical prolapse. The aim of this study was to estimate hospital costs for the most frequently performed operation, vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (VH) and the uterus-preserving Manchester-Fothergill procedure (MP), when including costs of postoperative activities.

METHODS: The study was based on a historical matched cohort including 590 patients (295 pairs) who underwent VH or MP during 2010-2014 owing to apical prolapse. The patients were matched according to age and preoperative prolapse stage and followed for a minimum of 20 months. Data were collected from four national registries and electronic medical records. Unit costs were obtained from relevant departments, hospital administration, calculated, or estimated by experts. The hospital perspective was applied for costing the resource use.

RESULTS: Total costs for the first 20 months after operation were 3,514 € per VH patient versus 2,318 € per MP patient. The cost difference between the techniques was 898 € (95% confidence interval [CI]: 818-982) per patient when analyzing the primary operation only and 1,196 € (CI: 927-1,465) when including subsequent activities within 20 months (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: The MP is substantially less expensive than the commonly used VH from a 20-month time perspective. Healthcare costs can be reduced by one third if MP is preferred over VH in the treatment of apical prolapse.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftInternational Urogynecology Journal
Vol/bind29
Udgave nummer8
Sider (fra-til)1161-1171
Antal sider11
ISSN0937-3462
DOI
StatusUdgivet - aug. 2018

ID: 56368567