Tannous Andrew, Floyd Jessica, Sheeder Jeanelle, Guntupalli Saketh
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Tannous), Saint Joseph Hospital, Denver, CO.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology (Floyd, Sheeder and Guntupalli), University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.
AJOG Glob Rep. 2025 May 19;5(3):100516. doi: 10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100516. eCollection 2025 Aug.
The social vulnerability index (SVI) measures socioeconomic hardship, with high SVI indicating high susceptibility. We applied the SVI to characterize and compare patients who underwent abdominal versus minimally invasive hysterectomy.
To evaluate whether high social vulnerability, as measured by SVI, was associated with a lower likelihood of undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy compared to abdominal hysterectomy.
This was a retrospective cohort study conducted across 4 hospitals within a single health system in Colorado. The study included patients who underwent hysterectomy for any indication between 2013 and 2018. Patient addresses were geocoded to estimate overall SVI and its 4 sub-domains: Socioeconomic, Housing/Disability, Race/Minority, and Housing/Transportation. These data were analyzed to evaluate for an association between SVI and surgical approach to hysterectomy.
Among 2,619 patients, 86% underwent MIH (87.3% non-Hispanic White [NHW]; 76.6% non-Hispanic Black [NHB]; 82.5% Hispanic). Patients undergoing MIH were more likely to be NHW, ASA class I or II, and less likely to have diabetes, hypertension, or receive care within a tertiary referral center (<.05). While MIH was not associated with high overall SVI (=.07), patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy were more likely to have high SVI in race/minority and housing/transportation sub-domains (=.006 and =.01, respectively). Significant differences in age, comorbidities, BMI class, hospital setting, route of hysterectomy were observed across all race/ethnic groups (<.001).Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that high overall SVI or high SVI in either race/minority or housing/transportation sub-domains was not significantly associated with MIH. However, age (aOR 0.97; [0.97-0.98]), NHW race/ethnicity (aOR 1.49; [1.14-1.94]), hospital setting within a tertiary referral center (aOR 0.29; [0.22-0.38]), and ASA class I (aOR 1.6; [1.05-2.46]) were independent predictors of MIH.
Age, race/ethnicity, hospital setting, and ASA class were found to be stronger independent predictors of MIH than SVI. Because race/ethnicity and hospital setting are independently associated with SVI based on prior study, we suspect that including these variables in the analysis weakened the observed independent association between SVI and route of hysterectomy. Further research is required to understand the underlying mechanisms driving surgical disparities, which may include systemic, institutional, or provider-level factors.
社会脆弱性指数(SVI)衡量社会经济困难程度,SVI值高表明易感性高。我们应用SVI来描述和比较接受腹部子宫切除术与微创子宫切除术的患者。
评估以SVI衡量的高社会脆弱性与接受微创子宫切除术相比接受腹部子宫切除术的可能性较低是否相关。
这是一项在科罗拉多州单一医疗系统内的4家医院进行的回顾性队列研究。该研究纳入了2013年至2018年间因任何适应症接受子宫切除术的患者。对患者地址进行地理编码以估计总体SVI及其4个亚领域:社会经济、住房/残疾、种族/少数群体和住房/交通。分析这些数据以评估SVI与子宫切除手术方式之间的关联。
在2619例患者中,86%接受了微创子宫切除术(非西班牙裔白人[NHW]为87.3%;非西班牙裔黑人[NHB]为76.6%;西班牙裔为82.5%)。接受微创子宫切除术的患者更可能是NHW、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)I或II级,且患糖尿病、高血压的可能性较小,或在三级转诊中心接受治疗的可能性较小(P<.05)。虽然微创子宫切除术与高总体SVI无关(P=.07),但接受腹部子宫切除术的患者在种族/少数群体和住房/交通亚领域更可能有高SVI(分别为P=.006和P=.01)。在所有种族/族裔群体中,年龄、合并症、体重指数类别、医院环境、子宫切除途径存在显著差异(P<.001)。多变量逻辑回归分析表明,高总体SVI或种族/少数群体或住房/交通亚领域中的高SVI与微创子宫切除术无显著关联。然而,年龄(调整后比值比[aOR]0.97;[0.97 - 0.98])、NHW种族/族裔(aOR 1.49;[1.14 - 1.94])、三级转诊中心内的医院环境(aOR 0.29;[0.22 - 0.38])和ASA I级(aOR 1.6;[1.05 - 2.46])是微创子宫切除术的独立预测因素。
发现年龄、种族/族裔、医院环境和ASA级别比SVI更能作为微创子宫切除术的独立预测因素。由于根据先前研究种族/族裔和医院环境与SVI独立相关,我们怀疑在分析中纳入这些变量削弱了观察到的SVI与子宫切除途径之间的独立关联。需要进一步研究以了解导致手术差异的潜在机制,这可能包括系统、机构或提供者层面的因素。