Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC · 2025
Socioeconomic Status and Choice of Primary Management of Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wozney Sarah, Maguire Finlay, Stairs Jocelyn
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) affects 25% of Canadian women. Characterizing socioeconomic barriers is essential for advocacy and patient-centred counselling. Our objective was to estimate the association between socioeconomic status and the primary management strategy among patients presenting for consultation for management of SUI.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used billing and diagnostic data from 2019 to 2022 to identify all patients with SUI presenting to a tertiary urogynaecology clinic in Nova Scotia, Canada. Socioeconomic status was estimated using after tax neighbourhood income quintiles derived using postal codes from 2021 Canadian census data and the PCCF+ 8A1 tool. The primary outcome was a composite of interventions not covered by our provincial health care plan. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between neighbourhood income and choice of patient cost-incurring interventions.
RESULTS: A total of 293 patients had a diagnosis of SUI and met criteria for inclusion: 4.4% chose expectant, 71.7% chose a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost, and 17.1% chose surgery. There was no difference in the odds of choosing a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost between those from low- and high-income neighbourhoods (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.75-2.34). Fewer patients from low-income neighbourhoods presented for consultation.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the likelihood of choosing a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost among patients with SUI from low- and high-income neighbourhoods. However, fewer patients from low-income neighbourhoods presented for care. Advocacy for equitable access to consultation and treatment may reduce barriers to access.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used billing and diagnostic data from 2019 to 2022 to identify all patients with SUI presenting to a tertiary urogynaecology clinic in Nova Scotia, Canada. Socioeconomic status was estimated using after tax neighbourhood income quintiles derived using postal codes from 2021 Canadian census data and the PCCF+ 8A1 tool. The primary outcome was a composite of interventions not covered by our provincial health care plan. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between neighbourhood income and choice of patient cost-incurring interventions.
RESULTS: A total of 293 patients had a diagnosis of SUI and met criteria for inclusion: 4.4% chose expectant, 71.7% chose a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost, and 17.1% chose surgery. There was no difference in the odds of choosing a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost between those from low- and high-income neighbourhoods (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.75-2.34). Fewer patients from low-income neighbourhoods presented for consultation.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the likelihood of choosing a conservative intervention that incurred patient cost among patients with SUI from low- and high-income neighbourhoods. However, fewer patients from low-income neighbourhoods presented for care. Advocacy for equitable access to consultation and treatment may reduce barriers to access.