Comparison of women's quality of life post abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25077/aoj.6.1.35-41.2022Abstract
Introduction:Hysterectomy is the most common major surgical procedure in gynecology. Approximately 90% of hysterectomies are performed on indications of benign gynecological disease. The number of women affected by hysterectomy is relatively low, but the impact of these complications often changes the quality of life. There are several types of hysterectomy, from partial/supravaginal, complete/total, to radical. Hysterectomy with any surgical technique can cause complications. This can be minimized by careful surgical planning and preparation before surgeryAssessing changes in quality of life after surgery is important for patient decision making and for health care evaluation, as health care becomes more standardized.
Objective: This study aims to determine the difference in quality of life between women who have undergone abdominal hysterectomy surgery and women who have undergone vaginal hysterectomy surgery.
Methods: This research is an analytic observational study with a cross sectional comparative study approach which was conducted on 54 women who had undergone hysterectomy at Dr. RSUP. M. Djamil, Padang. 27 of them underwent abdominal hysterectomy, and 27 others underwent vaginal hysterectomy. All patients were interviewed using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire. The assessment is carried out with a scoring system where a score of 0 is the lowest value, and 100 is the highest value.
Results: The average quality of life of the woman's post abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy was 91.71 ± 6.73 and 99.07 ± 1.66 respectively. There is a difference in the mean value of quality of life of women and post abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy (p<0.05).
Conclusion: There was a significant difference between the quality of life of women after hysterectomy, where women who underwent vaginal hysterectomy had a higher quality of life than women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy
Keywords: Hysterectomy, Abdominal, Vaginal, Quality of lifeReferences
Rose, John, Weiser, Thomas G, Hider, Phil, Wilson, Leona, Gruen, Russel, Bickler, Stephen W. Estimated need for surgery worldwide based on prevalence of diseases: implications for public health planning of surgical services. The Lancet Global Health. 2015;3:13-20.
Ranjan Kumar Prusty, Chetan Choithani and Shiv Dutt Gupta. Predictors of hysterectomy among married women 15–49 years in India. BioMed Central. 2018;15.
Correa-Ochoa, José Luis, Pandales-Pérez, Heleodora, Román-Vásquez, Vivian Lorena, Palacio-Arango, Berta Luz, Zuleta-Tobón, John Jairo. Impact on quality of life and sexual satisfaction of total abdominal hysterectomy and vaginal hysterectomy in the absence of prolapse. Cohort study, MedellÃn, 2015. Revista Colombiana de Obstetricia y GinecologÃa. 2017;68:12-24.
Selvanathan S, Acharya N, Singhal S. Quality of Life after Hysterectomy and Uterus†Sparing Hysteroscopic Management of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding or Heavy Menstrual Bleeding. Journal of Mid-life Health. 2019;10:63-69.
Birsen, Onur, Ozban, Ayse Secil, Ozban, Murat, Kuzu, Mehmet Ayhan. Effects of abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy on anorectal functions along with quality of life of the patient. African Health Sciences. 2018;18(3):612-622.
Forsgren, Catharina, Altman, Daniel. Long-term Effects of Hysterectomy. Aging Health. 2013;9(2):179-187.
Victoria L. Handa, Linda Van Le. Te Linde’s Operative Gynecology. 12 ed: Wolters Kluwer; 2020.
Kluivers., Theodoor E. Nieboer, Neil Johnson, Anne Lethaby, Emma Tavender, Elizabeth Curr, Ray Garry, Sabine van Voorst, Ben Willem J Mol, Kirsten B. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynecological disease. The WHO Reproductive Health Library. 2016(8).
Ontario. Quality-Based Procedures Clinical Handbook for Hysterectomy: Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; 2016.
Aarts JWM, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BWJ, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane database Syst Rev. 2015;8:CD003677.
Moen M, Walter A, Harmanli O, Cornella J, Nihira M, Gala R, et al. Considerations to improve the evidence-based use of vaginal hysterectomy in benign gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:585-8.
Dayaratna S, Goldberg J, Harrington C, Leiby BE, McNeil JM. Hospital costs of total vaginal hysterectomy compared with other minimally invasive hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:120.e1-6.
Sanei-Moghaddam A, Ma T, Goughnour SL, Edwards RP, Lounder PJ, Ismail N, et al. Changes in hysterectomy trends after the implementation of a clinical pathway. Obstet Gynecol 2016;127:139-47.
Cooper R, Mishra G, Hardy R, Kuh D. Hysterectomy and subsequent psychological health: findings from a British birth cohort study. J Affect Disord 2009;115:122-30.
Lonnerfors C, Reynisson P, Persson J. A randomized trial comparing vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy vs robot-assisted hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015;22:78–86.
Robert M, Cenaiko D, Sepandj J, Iwanicki S. Success and complications of salpingectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015;22:864–9.
AAGL. AAGL statement to the FDA on power morcellation. Available at: https://www.aagl.org/aaglnews/aagl-statement-to-the-fda-on-power-morcellation. Retrieved February 7, 2017.
Harris JA, Swenson CW, Uppal S, Kamdar N, Mahnert N, As-Sanie S, et al. Practice patterns and postoperative complications before and after U.S. Food and Drug Administration safety communication on power morcellation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:98.e1–13.
Cohen SL, Morris SN, Brown DN, Greenberg JA, Walsh BW, Gargiulo AR, et al. Contained tissue extraction using power morcellation: prospective evaluation of leakage parameters. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:257.e1–6.
Albright BB, Witte T, Tofte AN, Chou J, Black JD, Desai VB, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016;23:18–27.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Fauzan F
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain the copyright of published articles and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
License:
Andalas Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal (AOJ) is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This license permits anyone to copy and redistribute this material in any form or format, compose, modify, and make derivatives of this material for any purpose, including commercial purposes, as long as they credit the author for the original work.
