ArticleObstetrics and gynecology2018
Rate of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery Among Privately Insured Women in the United States, 2010-2013.
Article in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05658887 (A Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Preoperative Gabapentin Prior to Vaginal Apical Suspension Prolapse Procedures), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Preoperative Gabapentin Prior to Vaginal Apical Suspension Prolapse Procedures
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of enhanced recovery after surgery in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Quantification of senescence-associated secretory phenotype proteins in the vaginal secretions of pre- and postmenopausal women with and without prolapse.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2023Article
- Readmissions and perioperative outcomes for same-day versus next-day discharge after prolapse surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Predictors of prolonged admission after outpatient female pelvic reconstructive surgery.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2022Article
- Evaluation of 30-day complication rates following vaginal anterior compartment repair with and without graft augmentation in a propensity score matched cohort.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Food and Drug Administration Safety Communication on the Use of Transvaginal Mesh in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Surgery: The Impact of Social Determinants of Health.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery · 2021Observational
- Variations in Volume and Costs of Inpatient Admissions for Female Pelvic Reconstructive Procedures Across the United States.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery · 2021Article
- Perioperative outcomes after robotic versus vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.Journal of robotic surgery · 2020Article
- Severity and bother of prolapse symptoms in women with pelvic floor myofascial pain.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
- FPMRS challenges on behalf of the Collaborative Research in Pelvic Surgery Consortium (CoRPS): managing complicated cases : Series 3: Challenging recurrent prolapse in a medically complicated patient.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze utilization of, and payments for, pelvic organ prolapse procedures after the 2011 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communication regarding transvaginal mesh.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study examining private claims from three insurance providers for inpatient and outpatient prolapse procedures from 2010 to 2013 in the Health Care Cost Institute. Primary outcomes were the change in utilization of prolapse procedures, with and without mesh, before and after the July 2011 FDA communication. Secondary outcomes were the changes in payments and reimbursements for these procedures. Utilization rates and payments were compared using generalized linear models and interrupted time-series analysis.
resultsUtilization of prolapse procedures decreased from 12.3 to 9.7 per 10,000 woman-years (P=.027) with a decrease of 30.7% (3.9 in 2010 to 2.7 in 2013, P=.05) in number of mesh procedures and 16.6% (8.4 in 2010 to 7.0 in 2013, P=.011) for nonmesh procedures. Quarterly utilization of mesh procedures was increasing before the FDA communication and then significantly declined after its release (slope=0.024 vs -0.025, P=.002). Nonmesh procedures, however, were already slightly decreasing before July 2011 and continued to decline at a more rapid pace after that time, although not significantly (slope=-0.004 vs -0.022, P=.47). Inpatient utilization decreased 52.2% (P=.002), whereas outpatient utilization increased 18.5% (P=.132). Payments for individual inpatient procedures, with and without mesh, increased by 12.0% ($8,315 in 2010 to $9,315 in 2013, P=.001) and 15.6% ($7,826 in 2010 to $9,048 in 2013, P=.005), respectively, whereas those for outpatient procedures increased by 41% ($4,961 in 2010 to $6,981 in 2013, P=.006) and 30% ($3,955 in 2010 to $5,149 in 2013, P=.004), respectively.
conclusionUse of prolapse surgery declined during the study period. After the 2011 FDA communication regarding transvaginal mesh, there was a significant decrease in the utilization of procedures with mesh but not for those without mesh. A shift toward outpatient surgeries was observed, and payments for both individual inpatient and outpatient cases increased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.