Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Christian Kremer Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF
Correspondence to: S Duffy medsrd{at}gps.leeds.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To compare outpatient hysteroscopy with day case hysteroscopy in terms of patient satisfaction and acceptability.
Setting:
Gynaecology clinic of a teaching hospital.
Participants:
100 women.
Design and interventions:
Patients were randomly
allocated to outpatient hysteroscopy or day case hysteroscopy provided
they had no preference for either procedure.
Main outcome measures:
Satisfaction rate, requirements
for postoperative analgesia, speed of recovery, time away from home,
and time off work.
Results:
The outpatient group recovered preoperative fitness more quickly than the day case group (2 days (range 1-2.7) versus 3 days (2-4), P<0.05). After the procedure, the outpatient group were also fully mobile more quickly than the day case group (0 minutes (0-5) versus 105 minutes (80-120), P<0.001). Requirements for
postoperative analgesia were similar in both groups. Overall, 78% of
patients considered that the pain from outpatient hysteroscopy was less
than that usually experienced during menstruation. Patient satisfaction
was similar in both groups (83.6% in the outpatient group versus
77.0% in the day case group).
Conclusions:
Outpatient hysteroscopy and day case
hysteroscopy were equally acceptable to patients. Patients recovered
significantly more quickly from outpatient hysteroscopy than from day
case hysteroscopy.
|
Key messages
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Abnormal uterine bleeding is the second most common gynaecological
symptom. Hysteroscopy combined with endometrial biopsy has almost
replaced dilatation and curettage for the investigation of this
symptom.1 Most hysteroscopies are performed under general anaesthetic despite evidence suggesting it is a well tolerated and
acceptable outpatient procedure.
2 3
We describe the first randomised controlled trial of outpatient hysteroscopy versus day case
hysteroscopy. We hypothesised that satisfaction rates with the whole
process would be similar in the outpatient and day case arms of the study.
| |
Participants and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Participants
Our study was approved by the local ethics committee. One hundred
patients were recruited at the gynaecology clinic of a teaching
hospital. The inclusion criteria were bleeding from the vagina
requiring investigation (menorrhagia, intermenstrual bleeding, and
postmenopausal bleeding). We excluded patients who were unfit for day
case surgery and those who preferred either outpatient hysteroscopy or
day case hysteroscopy. In total, 454 patients were invited to
participate in the study: 235 (52%) and 118 (26%) patients opted for
outpatient and day case hysteroscopy respectively. One hundred patients
(22%) agreed to participate. Each was randomly
allocated at the gynaecology outpatient clinic to one of the two
investigations. Randomisation was achieved with sealed envelopes
containing computer generated block randomisation numbers.
Randomisation and recruitment to the study were carried out
independently of the clinician who later performed the hysteroscopy and
the person who performed the outcome assessments.
Hysteroscopy
Outpatient hysteroscopy was performed with a 3.6 mm
semiflexible hysteroscope (HYF-P, Keymed Olympus, Southend) and without
anaesthesia. Cervical dilatation up to Hegar number 4 was carried out
when deemed necessary. Any endometrial polyps were resected under
general anaesthesia at a later date. When the endometrium looked
abnormal sampling was performed with a Pipelle device (Laboratoire CCD,
Paris).5 Immediately after the investigation the patient
was asked to quantify the pain experienced during hysteroscopy.
Analgesia was provided if required. Patients were allowed home when
they felt ready.
|
Assessment of recovery
Recovery was assessed 30 minutes after the procedure with a
modified Steward scale (scale 0-12),
6 7
which included an
appreciation of the extent of consciousness, the quality of the airway,
the level of activity, and the presence of nausea or vomiting. A Likert
scale (scale 0-10) was used to assess the extent of pain
experienced on return to the ward in the day case group and on
return home in the outpatient group.8
Statistical analysis
Statistical significance was assessed by the Mann Whitney test,
2 test, Fisher's exact test, and unpaired
t test. When non-parametric tests and
2
tests or Fisher's exact tests were used interquartile
ranges and 95% confidence intervals of the difference between
proportions are given respectively.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Fifty patients were randomised to each procedure. Both groups were homogeneous for demographic data, anxiety levels, and risk factors for difficult hysteroscopy (table 2).
|
Two outpatient procedures failed (4%, 95% confidence interval 0% to 9%); one because of cervical stenosis and the other at the patient's request because of pelvic discomfort. Cervical dilatation was necessary in 11 patients in the outpatient group (22%, 10% to 33%).
Patient satisfaction
No difference was found in patient satisfaction rate between
outpatient hysteroscopy and day case hysteroscopy (table 3). In the
outpatient group, 13 (81%, 61% to 100%) of those patients who had
had hysteroscopy under general anaesthesia would opt for outpatient
hysteroscopy again. Endometrial sampling was performed in 31 patients
(62%) in the outpatient group. No significant difference in
satisfaction rates was found between the patients in whom endometrial
sampling was carried out and those in whom it was not (80.6% versus
88.8%,
11.6% to 28%).
|
Recovery
All patients who had undergone outpatient hysteroscopy scored the
maximal mark on the modified Steward scale (12/12) indicating full
recovery at 30 minutes. Seven out of 46 patients (14%) in the day case
group scored less than 12, mainly because of postoperative nausea or
vomiting. Two other patients were unable to communicate within 30 minutes of the procedure. Patients in the day case group took
significantly longer to recover full mobility and full fitness than
those in the outpatient group. Forty patients (80%) in the outpatient
group were fully mobile immediately after the procedure. Women in the
outpatient group spent significantly less time away from home and less
time off work than those in the day case group. Requirements for
postoperative analgesia were similar in both groups (table 3). Table 4
shows the intraoperative pain levels for the outpatient
group.
|
Factors associated with reduced patient satisfaction
Pain and the need for cervical dilatation during the procedure
were associated with a reduced level of satisfaction in the outpatient
group. There was a trend towards a lower satisfaction rate in
postmenopausal patients (table 5). Patients who required a repeat
procedure (10 of 49, 20%) were less satisfied than those who did not
(60% (6 of 10) versus 89% (35 of 39) respectively,
61% to 2%).
No association was found between the level of preoperative anxiety, the
use of analgesia, and the satisfaction rate.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Outpatient investigation of abnormal uterine bleeding is a comparatively new concept in gynaecology. Whereas endoscopy is accepted as an outpatient procedure in gastrointestinal medicine, the same is not true in gynaecology. There are potential advantages to an outpatient approach to investigation, least of which is the ability for direct access to services by general practitioners. We present the first randomised controlled trial of a strategy for outpatient investigation of women with abnormal uterine bleeding. Our trial compared traditional day case hysteroscopy, using general anaesthesia, with the novel outpatient approach.
Patient satisfaction and recovery
We set out to determine the differences in recovery and
acceptability between the two procedures, concentrating on the whole
process and not merely the technique of hysteroscopy. We found that
outpatient hysteroscopy was associated with equal patient satisfaction
to day case hysteroscopy. From the patients' and the healthcare
provider's perspective outpatient hysteroscopy is likely to be
more convenient than day case hysteroscopy as it is quicker and avoids
undue hospital stay.
Factors associated with patient satisfaction
Failure to gain access to the uterine cavity has been a concern in
outpatient hysteroscopy. Failure rates range from 1.5%9
to 9%.10 The failure rate in our study was 4%. A
satisfaction rate of 97% had been reported in a previous cohort study
11 12
despite a 6% failure rate and a mean visual
analogue score of 3.25.11 The inference is that patients
tolerate acceptable failure and discomfort and still remain satisfied.
Further studies
Recovery and requirements for analgesia were the main clinical
outcomes addressed in our study. The comparison of aspects such as
diagnostic value and morbidity can not be assessed in a study of this
size. Our results provide an interesting preliminary finding that
should lead to a much larger randomised study addressing these other
important clinical issues. Data from large cohort studies suggest that
outpatient hysteroscopy is just as safe as hysteroscopy under general
anaesthesia.
3 13
| |
Conclusion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patients are not disadvantaged by the introduction of
outpatient hysteroscopy. Several advantages may prove attractive to patients and healthcare providers: return to mobility, full fitness, and work occur more quickly after outpatient hysteroscopy than after
day case hysteroscopy. Increased attention should be paid during
counselling of patients at higher risk of dissatisfaction with
hysteroscopy, such as postmenopausal patients. The development of
outpatient hysteroscopy is a potentially significant advance in
gynaecological investigation. It lends itself to a greater accessibility for general practitioners and patients, especially if a
direct referral service from a general practitioner is contemplated.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Contributors: MA and SD conceived and designed the study. CK performed all the procedures and collected and analysed the data. CK and SD wrote the paper. SD will act as guarantor for the paper.
Funding: None.
Competing interests: None declared.
website extra: The sample size calculation appears on the BMJ's website www.bmj.com
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Goldrath MH, Sherman AI. Office hysteroscopy and suction curettage: can we eliminate the hospital diagnostic dilatation and curettage? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 152: 220-229[Medline]. |
| 2. | De Jong P, Doel F, Falconer A. Outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 97: 299-303[Medline]. |
| 3. | Kremer C, Barik S, Duffy S. Flexible outpatient hysteroscopy without anaesthesia: a safe, successful and well tolerated procedure. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105: 672-676[Medline]. |
| 4. | Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361-370[Medline]. |
| 5. | Hamou J, Taylor PJ. Panoramic, contact, and microcolpohysteroscopy in gynecologic practice. Curr Probl Obstet Gynecol 1982; 6: 6-74. |
| 6. | Steward DJ. A simplified scoring system for the postoperative recovery room. Can Anaesth Soc J 1975; 22: 111-113[Medline]. |
| 7. | Sanders LD, Clyburn PA, Rosen M, Robinson JO. Propofol in short gynaecological procedures. Anaesthesia 1991; 46: 451-455[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 8. | Jamison NR. Clinical measurement of pain. In: Ferrante FM, Vadeboncouer TR, eds. Postoperative pain management. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1993:119-132. |
| 9. | Lin BL, Iwata Y, Liu KH, Valle RF. The Fujinon diagnostic fiber-optic hysteroscope. Experience with 1503 patients. J Reprod Med 1990; 35: 685-689[Medline]. |
| 10. | La Sala GB, Sacchetti F, Dessanti L, Torelli MG, Sartori F. Panoramic diagnostic microhysteroscopy: analysis of results obtained from 976 patients. Acta Eur Fertil 1986; 17: 369-375[Medline]. |
| 11. | Downes E, Al-Azzawi F. How well do perimenopausal patients accept outpatient hysteroscopy? Visual analogue scoring of acceptability and pain in 100 women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1993; 48: 37-41[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 12. | Finikiotis G. Outpatient hysteroscopy: pain assessment by visual analogue scale. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 30: 89. |
| 13. | Nagele F, O'Connor H, Davies A, Badawy A, Mohamed H, Magos AL. 2500 outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopies. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 87-92[CrossRef][Medline]. |
(Accepted 24 September 1999)
Read all Rapid Responses