American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 202, Issue 5 , Pages 501.e1-501.e7, May 2010

Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979–2006

Presented at the 30th Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society, Hollywood, FL, Sept. 24-26, 2009.

  • Keisha A. Jones, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Hospital, University of Pittsburgh-School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
    • ,
  • Jonathan P. Shepherd, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Hospital, University of Pittsburgh-School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
    • ,
  • Sallie S. Oliphant, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Hospital, University of Pittsburgh-School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
    • ,
  • Li Wang, MS

      Affiliations

    • Office of Clinical Research, University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
    • ,
  • Clareann H. Bunker, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Office of Clinical Research, University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
    • ,
  • Jerry L. Lowder, MD, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Hospital, University of Pittsburgh-School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA

Received 1 August 2009; received in revised form 23 October 2009; accepted 12 January 2010. published online 12 March 2010.

Objective

We sought to describe national trends for inpatient procedures for pelvic organ prolapse from 1979–2006.

Study Design

The National Hospital Discharge Survey was analyzed for patient and hospital demographics, as were International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnostic and procedures codes from 1979–2006. Age-adjusted rates (AARs) per 1000 women were calculated using the 1990 US Census data.

Results

There was a significantly decreasing trend in the AARs for inpatient prolapse procedures, from 2.93–1.52 per 1000 women from 1979–2006. AARs for hysterectomy decreased from 8.39–4.55 per 1000 women from 1979–2006. Over the study period, AARs remained at about the 1979 level among the women ≥52 years old (2.73–2.86; P = .075). In women <52 years old, AARs declined to less than one-third of the 1979 rate (3.03–0.84; P < .001).

Conclusion

AARs for inpatient procedures for prolapse in the United States remained stable for women aged ≥52 years from 1979–2006; rates declined by two-thirds for women aged <52 years.

Key words: hospital discharge database, pelvic organ prolapse

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Cite this article as: Jones KA, Shepherd JP, Oliphant SS, et al. Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979–2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;200:501.e1-7.

 Reprints not available from the authors.

 This study was supported by Grant no. UL1 RR024153 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of NCRR or NIH. Information on NCRR is available at http://www.ncrr.nih.gov.

PII: S0002-9378(10)00028-1

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.017

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 202, Issue 5 , Pages 501.e1-501.e7, May 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution