Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Jennifer Bainbridge, Gayle Cosgrove, Janice Gebbie
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
© 2016, The Author(s). Uterine polyps can cause abnormal bleeding in women. Conventional practise is to remove them under general anaesthesia but advances in technology have made it possible to perform polypectomy in the office setting. We conducted a patient-preference study to explore women’s preferences for treatment setting and to evaluate the effectiveness and treatment experience of women undergoing uterine polypectomy. Three hundred ninety-nine women with abnormal uterine bleeding who were found to have uterine polyps at diagnostic hysteroscopy were recruited. Office polypectomies were performed in office hysteroscopy clinics, and inpatient procedures were undertaken in operating theatres. Three hundred twenty-four of 399 (81 %) expressed a preference for office treatment. There was no difference found between office treatment and inpatient treatment in terms of alleviating abnormal uterine bleeding as assessed by patients and in improving disease-specific quality of life. Acceptability was lower and patient pain scores were significantly higher in the office group. When offered a choice of treatment setting for uterine polypectomy, patients have a preference for office over inpatient treatment. Ambulatory gynaecology services should be available within healthcare systems to meet patient demand.
Author(s): Cooper NAM, Middleton L, Smith P, Denny E, Stobert L, Daniels J, Clark TJ, Cannon K, Farag KA, Raychaudhuri K, Reid M, Zahid A, Blunn J, Guruswami S, Irani S, Robinson D, Bingham T, Clark TJ, Cooper NAM, Gupta J, Madari S, Mellers D, O'Connor S, O'Hara C, Pathak M, Preece V, Sangha E, Shehmar M, Trinham P, Wilson A, Dent J, Macdonald J, Sengupta P, Brookes C, Davies J, Jackson M, Jones S, Ludkin H, Riddiough S, Allen J, Cathcart T, Cox D, Ford S, Kenny L, Phillips K, Rawal N, Rodgers A, Siddiqui J, Dine-Atkinson A, Kalkur S, Merriner G, Ben-Nagi J, Raza A, Richardson R, Hassan I, Edmundson D, Chamberlain J, Barge A, Wake P, Milford D, Walton E, Arnold S, Blake M, McCormack MJ, Naddad N, Hane J, Wood S, Labib M, Martin T, Moss S, Aziz N, Harris L, Pattison D, Pepper J, Escott M, Fender G, Saeed M, Antoniou A, Chenoy R, Morris E, Sule M, Cope A, Sharma S, Taylor T, Panay N, Rothan C, Coker A, Abdel-Aty M, Bhatia K, Gardiner S, Myint W, Willett M, Brown V, Bonner C, Connor M, Stillwell S, Horne A, Milne S, Rowan J, Ewies A, Kabukoba J, Biancardi R, Donnelly K, Dwyer L, Naidoo K, Pinton I, Chin K, Harrison T, Roger J, Sirdefield D, Stacey J, Anjum Z, Bainbridge J, Cosgrove G, Desai A, Gebbie J, Koleskas D, Ranka P, Roberts M, Cunningham C, Nwosu C
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Gynecological Surgery
Year: 2016
Volume: 13
Issue: 4
Pages: 313-322
Online publication date: 17/05/2016
Acceptance date: 05/04/2016
Date deposited: 04/04/2017
ISSN (print): 1613-2076
ISSN (electronic): 1613-2084
Publisher: Springer Verlag
URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0946-4
DOI: 10.1007/s10397-016-0946-4
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
