Louie, Michelle

Objective: To evaluate the relationship between race and social determinants of health and receipt of hysterectomy versus uterine-preserving fibroid treatment. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using deidentified claims and longitudinal health data from OptumLabs ® Data Warehouse. Patients aged 15–55 years with newly diagnosed fibroids between 2010 and 2023 were included. Menopausal individuals and those with gynecological cancer were excluded. The primary outcome was hysterectomy by any route versus uterine-preserving fibroid surgery within 180 days of fibroid diagnosis. We used logistic regression to assess associations between socioeconomic factors and receipt of hysterectomy after adjusting for pertinent covariates. Results: A total of 73,479 individuals were included; 50,645 received hysterectomy, 22,834 received a uterine-preserving treatment. Race, income, education level, and rurality were independently associated with the probability of hysterectomy. Odds of hysterectomy were lower for all people of color compared with White individuals (Asian odds ratio [OR] 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56–0.66], Black OR: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.67–0.73], and Hispanic OR: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.86–0.95]). Individuals with household income <$40,000, less than high school education, and rural address were more likely to undergo hysterectomy compared with those with income >$124,999 (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.09–1.21), bachelor’s degree or higher (OR: 2.55, 95% CI: 1.78–3.65), and metropolitan address (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.44–2.01). All associations were significant at p < 0.05. Conclusion: People with fewer socioeconomic advantages, such as lower household income, lower educational attainment, and rural address were more likely to receive hysterectomy rather than uterine-preserving fibroid treatment. After controlling for age, surgery year, and socioeconomic factors, people of color were less likely to receive hysterectomy rather than uterine-preserving fibroid treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Although hysterectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the United States, preoperative patient counseling regarding removal or preservation of the cervix, fallopian tubes, and ovaries during benign hysterectomy is far from standardized. We aimed to understand patients' preexisting values, beliefs, and preferences regarding removal or preservation of the cervix, ovaries, and fallopian tubes at the time of benign hysterectomy. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using semistructured interview of patients referred for benign hysterectomy with a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery division. Participants were recruited according to prespecified diversity axes. The interview guide was informed by literature review, expert stakeholders, and pilot testing. Telephone interviews occurred prior to their scheduled consultation with a surgeon. Responses were analyzed for themes using Rapid and Rigorous Data Qualitative Analysis. IRB approval was obtained. RESULTS: Age of participants (n=13) ranged from 24 to 60. Participants reported their race as non-Hispanic White (n=6), non-Hispanic Black (n=3), Hispanic (n=2), and multiracial or another race (n=2). Participants reported use of commercial insurance (n=8), Medicaid/Medicare (n=2), or self-pay/financial assistance (n=3). Identified themes included knowledge, decision making, treatment goals, short- and long-term consequences, fertility, identity, and lack of concern. Many participants expressed lacking necessary knowledge of the risks and benefits of removing the cervix and adnexa. Treatment goals included symptom relief and definitive treatment. Long-term consequences included concerns about menopause and future cancer. CONCLUSION: Prior to counseling, many patients express some degree of lack of knowledge, desire to remove most or all pelvic structures, and no attachment to their reproductive organs. Many patients expressed making decisions based on how organ removal will relieve current symptoms and long-term consequences, rather than immediate surgical risk, which can inform patient-centered counseling by their surgeon.

Since fibroids are known to be hormonally receptive tumors, it is biologically plausible that fibroids decrease in size after menopause. Patients may opt for more conservative therapy or expectant management if fibroid growth could be predicted[1](#ref-0001). Studies assessing fibroid growth in premenopausal patients have shown that individual tumors in a single uterus grow at different rates and can grow consistently or in short bursts 2 . These variations and the unknown effect of natural menopause make patient counseling difficult. Studies that include only symptomatic menopausal patients or those undergoing treatment can result in selection bias towards fibroids that are increasing in size 3,4 . The objective of our study was to estimate fibroid growth course before and after menopause among women not specifically seeking fibroid treatment. Our hypothesis was that fibroid growth would decline after menopause.

Objective: The effects of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics on delay of minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were studied. The primary outcome was interval between first MIGS appointment and date of surgery. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used electronic medical record data of a historical cohort who had benign MIGS in 2014–2016 ( n = 370) and a cohort in 2020 during the COVID pandemic ( n = 249). Included procedures were laparoscopic hysterectomy, myomectomy, adnexal surgery, or endometriosis excision. Patient demographics (race, ethnicity, age, marital status, language, insurance, and socioeconomic factors) were evaluated for associations with surgery delay (> 90 days from initial consultation to operating room date). Results: Median time to surgery was 21 days faster during the pandemic. In the historical cohort, 61% patients waited >90 days, and in the pandemic cohort, 47% patients waited >90 days. In the pandemic cohort, race and primary language were new factors associated with surgery delays. During the pandemic, a greater proportion of patients having surgery delays were Black or other races, compared to White, and a greater proportion did not speak English. After adjusting for referral indications, in multivariable logistic regression, patients who reported Other race had 3 times the odds of surgery delay, compared to White patients. Black patients had higher odds of surgery delay, although this estimate was less precise. Patients with a non-English primary language had >4 times the odds of surgery delay. Ethnicity, insurance and employment status, median household income, neighborhood segregation, and distance to hospital were not associated with surgery delay. Telemedicine accounted for 71% of visits in the pandemic cohort and was associated with a significant decrease in surgery delays with a median wait time of 87 days for patients seen via telemedicine, compared to 101 days for patients seen in-person. A higher proportion of patients using telemedicine were White and spoke English. Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, non-English primary language, and unemployment were associated with in-person versus telemedicine visits. Visit type was not correlated with insurance status, median household income, neighborhood segregation, and distance from the hospital. A risk score was calculated to summarize the estimated effect of intersectionality of multiple identities; multiple minority characteristics were correlated with surgery delays. Time to benign MIGS decreased from historical baselines during the pandemic, indicating improved access to surgical care. This benefit did not apply equally. Disproportionately, White patients who spoke English had no delays and used telemedicine; racial minority patients who did not speak English had greater odds of surgery delays and in-person appointments. Conclusions: Telemedicine can improve access to both MIGS care and surgical outcomes; additional strategies are needed to ensure that all patients receive care advances equitably. (J GYNECOL SURG 39:162)