PREVALENCE AND DETERMINANTS OF HYSTERECTOMY IN THE GYNECOLOGY UNIT OF AYUB TEACHING HOSPITAL, ABBOTTABAD

A SHAHEEN; H IQBAL; I BIBI; A HAYAT; S SHAHID; SK WAZIR

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.1224

Authors

A SHAHEEN Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ATH MTI, Abbottabad, Pakistan
H IQBAL Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ATH MTI, Abbottabad, Pakistan
I BIBI Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ATH MTI, Abbottabad, Pakistan
A HAYAT Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ATH MTI, Abbottabad, Pakistan
S SHAHID Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ATH MTI, Abbottabad, Pakistan
SK WAZIR Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, THQ hospital Paroa, D.I.Khan, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.1224

Keywords:

Hysterectomy, Determinants, Prevalence, Gynecology

Abstract

Hysterectomy is one of the most common obstetric surgery performed on women. It provides symptomatic relief, reduces morbidity and enhances the quality of life but can also lead to complications like mental stress, infertility, fractures and cardiovascular insults. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have provided information regarding the prevalence and risk factors of hysterectomies in Pakistani females. Objective: The goal of this study is to investigate the prevalence and socio-demographic determinants of hysterectomy in a teaching hospital in Pakistan, Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was done in the Gynecology C unit of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad from 25th July 2024 to 10th Oct, 2024 after taking approval from ethical committee. 246 patients who underwent major gynaecological procedures were included in this study. Basic demographics, type of procedure and indication for hysterectomy were noted after obtaining consent from the patient. Results: The overall prevalence of hysterectomy was around 36.9% in our study. Heavy menstrual bleeding (43.95%) was found to be the leading cause of hysterectomy followed by fibroid uterus and adenomyosis in 25.27% and 16.48% cases respectively. Additionally, age group 45-49 (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.5-2.1), urban residence (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.64-1.8), more gravida (OR: 2.08, 95% CI: 0.88-4.92) and higher socioeconomic levels (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.62-2.64) were found to increase odds of hysterectomy, whereas having a job (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.47-1.44) and getting college education (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.4- 1.7) were found to decrease the risk of hysterectomy. Conclusion: The prevalence of hysterectomy was found to be higher than in other countries. Urban residence, multigravida, higher socioeconomic levels and older age groups tend to increase the odds of hysterectomy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Harvey SV, Pfeiffer RM, Landy R, Wentzensen N, Clarke MA. Trends and predictors of hysterectomy prevalence among women in the United States. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2022;227(4):611. e1-. e12.

Rout D, Sinha A, Palo SK, Kanungo S, Pati S. Prevalence and determinants of hysterectomy in India. Scientific reports. 2023;13(1):14569.

Hakkarainen J, Nevala A, Tomás E, Nieminen K, Malila N, Pitkäniemi J, et al. Decreasing trend and changing indications of hysterectomy in Finland. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica scandinavica. 2021;100(9):1722-9.

Huque S, Roberts I, Fawole B, Chaudhri R, Arulkumaran S, Shakur-Still H. Risk factors for peripartum hysterectomy among women with postpartum haemorrhage: analysis of data from the WOMAN trial. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018;18:1-8.

Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BWJ, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015(8).

King CR, Giles D. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics. 2016;43(3):463-78.

Sparić R, Hudelist G, Berisavac M, Gudović A, Buzadžić S. Hysterectomy throughout history. Acta chirurgica Iugoslavica. 2011;58(4):9-14.

Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2007;110(5):1091-5.

Redburn J, Murphy M. Hysterectomy prevalence and adjusted cervical and uterine cancer rates in England and Wales. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2001;108(4):388-95.

Scime NV, Brown HK, Metcalfe A, Brennand EA. Prevalence of hysterectomy by self-reported disability among Canadian women: Findings from a national cross-sectional survey. Women's Health Reports. 2021;2(1):557-65.

Stang A, Kluttig A, Moebus S, Völzke H, Berger K, Greiser KH, et al. Educational level, prevalence of hysterectomy, and age at amenorrhoea: a cross-sectional analysis of 9536 women from six population-based cohort studies in Germany. BMC Women's Health. 2014;14:1-9.

Kumari P, Kundu J. Prevalence, socio-demographic determinants, and self-reported reasons for hysterectomy and choice of hospitalization in India. BMC Women's Health. 2022;22(1):514.

Rajkumari S, Chaudhary V, Kasaudhan S, Saraswathy KN. Incidence and determinants of hysterectomy among North Indian women: An 8-year follow-up study. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022;10:1065081.

Chen I, Wise MR, Dunn S, Anderson G, Degani N, Lefebvre G, et al. Social and geographic determinants of hysterectomy in Ontario: a population-based retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. 2017;39(10):861-9.

Rannestad T. Hysterectomy: effects on quality of life and psychological aspects. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology. 2005;19(3):419-30.

Thakar R, Ayers S, Georgakapolou A, Clarkson P, Stanton S, Manyonda I. Hysterectomy improves quality of life and decreases psychiatric symptoms: a prospective and randomised comparison of total versus subtotal hysterectomy. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2004;111(10):1115-20.

Garry R. Health economics of hysterectomy. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology. 2005;19(3):451-65.

Chou P-H, Lin C-H, Cheng C, Chang C-L, Tsai C-J, Tsai C-P, et al. Risk of depressive disorders in women undergoing hysterectomy: A population-based follow-up study. Journal of psychiatric research. 2015;68:186-91.

Xu W, Wu W, Yang S, Chen T, Teng X, Gao D, et al. Risk of osteoporosis and fracture after hysterectomies without oophorectomies: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Osteoporosis International. 2022;33(8):1677-86.

Shekhar C, Paswan B, Singh A. Prevalence, sociodemographic determinants and self-reported reasons for hysterectomy in India. Reproductive health. 2019;16:1-16.

Prusty RK, Choithani C, Gupta SD. Predictors of hysterectomy among married women 15–49 years in India. Reproductive health. 2018;15:1-11.

Reilly M. Health Disparities and Access to Healthcare in Rural vs. Urban Areas. Theory in Action. 2021;14(2).

Cyr ME, Etchin AG, Guthrie BJ, Benneyan JC. Access to specialty healthcare in urban versus rural US populations: a systematic literature review. BMC health services research. 2019;19:1-17.

Desai S, Campbell OM, Sinha T, Mahal A, Cousens S. Incidence and determinants of hysterectomy in a low-income setting in Gujarat, India. Health policy and planning. 2017;32(1):68-78.

Kuppermann M, Learman LA, Schembri M, Gregorich SE, Jackson R, Jacoby A, et al. Predictors of hysterectomy use and satisfaction. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010;115(3):543-51.

Anbreen F, Qadir S, Naeem H, Farhat N, Ghafoor M, Hassan S. Type, time-trend and indications of hysterectomy. Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences. 2018;16(4):92-6.

Bibi S. Analysis of Indications and Different Surgical Approaches for Gynecological Hysterectomies at A Tertiary Care Hospital. Journal of Surgery Pakistan. 2022;27(3):95-9.

Cooper R, Hardy R, Kuh D. Timing of menarche, childbearing and hysterectomy risk. Maturitas. 2008;61(4):317-22.

Warner P. Preferences regarding treatments for period problems: relationship to menstrual and demographic factors. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1994;15(2):93-110.