SynthesisInternational urogynecology journal2022
Practice pattern variation: treatment of pelvic organ prolapse in The Netherlands.
Synthesis in International urogynecology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Economic evaluation of Manchester procedure versus sacrospinous hysteropexy: A follow-up analysis of a randomized clinical trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Key Conditions for Successful Implementation of the Manchester Procedure as Primary Surgical Treatment for Mild to Moderate Uterine Prolapse: A Qualitative Study Among Dutch Gynecologists.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- The presacral-uterosacral hysteropexy - a novel native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2025Article
- Response to letter to "Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher".International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Article
- Patient's preference for sacrospinous hysteropexy or modified Manchester operation: A discrete choice experiment.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisGreat variety in clinical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has been described over the last years. Practice pattern variation (PPV) reflects differences in care that cannot be explained by the underlying condition. We aim to explore whether PPV in management of POP in The Netherlands has changed between 2011 and 2017.
methodsWe conducted a multicenter cohort study, using prospective routinely collected benchmark data from LOGEX, a healthcare analytics company (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Data of patients with a diagnosis POP from 50 hospitals (16 teaching and 34 non-teaching hospitals) were collected for the years 2011 and 2017. All treatments were categorized into three groups: conservative treatment, uterus-preserving or uterus-removing surgery. Using meta-analysis, we evaluated whether the proportions of conducted treatments changed over time and estimated the between-center variation (Cochran's Q), reflecting the PPV in 2011 and 2017. This variation was analyzed using F-tests.
resultsCompared to 2011, referral for POP in 2017 decreased by 16.2% (-4505 patients), and the percentage of hysterectomies decreased by 33.6% (p < 0.0001). The PPV of POP surgery decreased significantly by 47.2% (p = 0.0137) and of hysterectomies by 41.5% (p = 0.0316).
conclusionsWe found a decline in PPV for POP surgery between 2011 and 2017. Furthermore, the number of surgical interventions decreased, which was mostly due to a decline of hysterectomies. This indicates a shift toward more conservative therapy and uterus preservation. A further reduction of PPV would be beneficial for the quality of health care.
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.