Suppr超能文献

全民保险能否减轻微创子宫切除术中的种族差异?

Does Universal Insurance Mitigate Racial Differences in Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy?

作者信息

Ranjit Anju, Sharma Meesha, Romano Aasia, Jiang Wei, Staat Bart, Koehlmoos Tracey, Haider Adil H, Little Sarah E, Witkop Catherine T, Robinson Julian N, Cohen Sarah L

机构信息

Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.

Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.

出版信息

J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Jul-Aug;24(5):790-796. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.03.016. Epub 2017 Mar 25.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine if racial differences exist in receipt of minimally invasive hysterectomy (defined as total vaginal hysterectomy [TVH] and total laparoscopic hysterectomy [TLH]) compared with an open approach (total abdominal hysterectomy [TAH]) within a universally insured patient population.

DESIGN

Retrospective data analysis (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

The 2006-2010 national TRICARE (universal insurance coverage to US Armed Services members and their dependents) longitudinal claims data.

PATIENTS

Women aged 18 years and above who underwent hysterectomy stratified into 4 racial groups: white, African American, Asian, and "other."

INTERVENTION

Receipt of hysterectomy (TAH, TVH, or TLH).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We used risk-adjusted multinomial logistic regression models to determine the relative risk ratios of receipt of TVH and TLH compared with TAH in each racial group compared with referent category of white patients for benign conditions. Among 33 015 patients identified, 60.82% (n = 20 079) were white, 26.11% (n = 8621) African American, 4.63% (n = 1529) Asian, and 8.44% (n = 2786) other. Most hysterectomies (83.9%) were for benign indications. Nearly 42% of hysterectomies (n = 13 917) were TAH, 27% (n = 8937) were TVH, and 30% (n = 10 161) were TLH. Overall, 36.37% of white patients received TAH compared with 53.40% of African American patients and 51.01% of Asian patients (p < .001). On multinomial logistic regression analyses, African American patients were significantly less likely than white patients to receive TVH (relative risk ratio [RRR], .63; 95% confidence interval [CI], .58-.69) or TLH (RRR, .65; 95% CI, .60-.71) compared with TAH. Similarly, Asian patients were less likely than white patients to receive TVH (RRR, .71; 95% CI, .60-.84) or TLH (RRR, .69; 95% CI, .58-.83) compared with TAH. Analyses by benign indications for surgery showed similar trends.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that racial minority patients are less likely to receive a minimally invasive surgical approach compared with an open abdominal approach despite universal insurance coverage. Further work is warranted to better understand factors other than insurance access that may contribute to racial differences in surgical approach to hysterectomies.

摘要

研究目的

在全民参保的患者群体中,确定与开放式手术(经腹全子宫切除术[TAH])相比,接受微创子宫切除术(定义为经阴道全子宫切除术[TVH]和全腹腔镜子宫切除术[TLH])是否存在种族差异。

设计

回顾性数据分析(加拿大工作组分类II-2)。

研究背景

2006 - 2010年国家军人医疗保险(为美国武装部队成员及其家属提供全民保险)纵向索赔数据。

患者

年龄18岁及以上接受子宫切除术的女性,分为4个种族组:白人、非裔美国人、亚洲人和“其他”。

干预措施

接受子宫切除术(TAH、TVH或TLH)。

测量指标及主要结果

我们使用风险调整的多项逻辑回归模型,确定与白人患者的参照类别相比,各种族组中接受TVH和TLH与TAH相比的相对风险比,用于良性疾病。在33015名确定的患者中,60.82%(n = 20079)为白人,26.11%(n = 8621)为非裔美国人,4.63%(n = 1529)为亚洲人,8.44%(n = 2786)为其他。大多数子宫切除术(83.9%)是出于良性指征。近42%的子宫切除术(n = 13917)为TAH,27%(n = 8937)为TVH,30%(n = 10161)为TLH。总体而言,36.37%的白人患者接受TAH,相比之下,非裔美国患者为53.40%,亚洲患者为51.01%(p <.001)。在多项逻辑回归分析中,与TAH相比,非裔美国患者接受TVH(相对风险比[RRR],0.63;95%置信区间[CI],0.58 - 0.69)或TLH(RRR,0.65;95% CI,0.60 - 0.71)的可能性明显低于白人患者。同样,与TAH相比,亚洲患者接受TVH(RRR,0.71;95% CI,0.60 - 0.84)或TLH(RRR,0.69;95% CI,0.58 - 0.83)的可能性低于白人患者。按手术的良性指征进行分析显示了类似趋势。

结论

我们证明,尽管有全民保险覆盖,但少数族裔患者与开放式腹部手术相比,接受微创外科手术方法的可能性较小。有必要进一步开展工作,以更好地了解除保险获取之外可能导致子宫切除术手术方法种族差异的因素。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验