Obstetrics & Gynecology Email Alerts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Obstetrics & Gynecology 1996;88:241-245
© 1996 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vilos, G.
Right arrow Articles by Botz, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vilos, G.
Right arrow Articles by Botz, C.

Articles

Economic evaluation of hysteroscopic endometrial ablation versus vaginal hysterectomy for menorrhagia

GA Vilos, JT Pispidikis, and CK Botz

OBJECTIVES: To estimate society's expenses and benefits of hysteroscopic endometrial ablation and vaginal hysterectomy for the treatment of women with menorrhagia. METHODS: Between June 1992 and July 1993, 40 women with menorrhagia underwent vaginal hysterectomy by five surgeons in one hospital. These patients were compared retrospectively with the first 40 patients having had endometrial ablation for menorrhagia during the same period by the senior author (GAV). The age, parity, weight of patients, and uterine size were similar in both groups. Measurable variables that would incur costs included surgical time, procedure time (anesthetist and resource use in operating room), length of hospital stay, convalescence (value of patient time), and indirect costs associated with subsequent surgical procedures. Measurable benefits included reduction in blood loss and complications, and effectiveness of procedure. RESULTS: The total cost per episode of care was estimated to be $5373 and $2279 (1995 Canadian dollars) for vaginal hysterectomy and hysteroscopic endometrial ablation, respectively, a mean savings of $3094. The benefits derived from both procedures were comparable. Vaginal hysterectomy eliminated bleeding in 100% of patients and had a complication rate of 41%. Endometrial ablation eliminated or improved bleeding in 90% of patients (amenorrhea 46%, hypomenorrhea 35%, eumenorrhea 9%, no significant change 10%), was associated with no complications, and resulted in 82% patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Endometrial ablation is 82% effective and 58% less expensive than vaginal hysterectomy for the treatment of women with menorrhagia.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
J. H.S. You, D. S. Sahota, and P. MoYuen
A cost-utility analysis of hysterectomy, endometrial resection and ablation and medical therapy for menorrhagia
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2006; 21(7): 1878 - 1883.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Obstet GynecolHome page
S. Subramanian, M. A. Clark, and K. Isaacson
Outcome and Resource Use Associated With Myomectomy
Obstet. Gynecol., October 1, 2001; 98(4): 583 - 587.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JWatch Women's HealthHome page
Endometrial Ablation vs. Vaginal Hysterectomy for Menorrhagia
Journal Watch Women's Health, October 1, 1996; 1996(1001): 9 - 9.
[Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.