Health Care Disparities in Surgical Management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Contemporary Nationwide Analysis

Abstract

Objectives Our objective was to compare the rate of native tissue repair (NTR) versus sacrocolpopexy (SCP) and reconstructive (RECON) versus obliterative repair (OBR) for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), evaluating for health care disparities based on race, socioeconomic, and geographic factors. Methods The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for patients older than 18 years undergoing POP surgery from 2008 to 2018. Baseline demographics, comorbidity index, socioeconomic, and hospital variables were extracted. The weighted t test, Wilcoxon test, and χ2 test were used to compare the rate of (1) NTR versus SCP and (2) RECON vs OBR. Multivariate weighted logistic regression was used to compare while controlling for confounders. Reference groups were White race, Medicare patients, northeast region, small hospital size, and rural location. Results Of 71,262 patients, 67,382 (94.6%) underwent RECON. Patients undergoing OBR were older and had a higher comorbidity score. Multivariate analysis showed the following: (1) Black, Hispanic, and other races; (2) Medicaid patients; (3) patients at urban teaching hospitals are less likely to receive RECON. Patients in the midwest were more likely to receive RECON. Among 68,401 patients, 23,808 (34.8%), and 44,593 (65.19%) underwent SCP and NTR, respectively. Hysterectomy was more common in the NTR group. Multivariate analysis showed the following:(1) Black, Hispanic, and “other” races; (2) uninsured and Medicaid patients; (3) patients in the midwest, south, and west were at higher odds of receiving NTR. Patients in large and urban hospitals were less likely to undergo NTR. Conclusions Racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities exist in surgical management for POP warranting further study to seek to eliminate these disparities.