European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2006
Operative laparoscopy in The Netherlands: Diffusion and acceptance.
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.
Kolkman Wendela, Trimbos-Kemper Trudy C M, Jansen Frank Willem
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and update the current status of the implementation of operative laparoscopy in gynaecology in The Netherlands by assessing diffusion and acceptance of each specific procedure per hospital.
STUDY DESIGN: In 2003 a questionnaire was sent to all hospitals (n = 102), which addressed the total number and type of laparoscopic procedures performed in 2002 stratified by level of difficulty (level 1: diagnostic laparoscopy, sterilization, tubal patency tests; level 2: adhesiolysis, ectopic pregnancy (EP), laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis, cystectomy, oophorectomy, LAVH, tubal surgery for infertility; level 3: myomectomy, total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and sacropexy). Data were compared to previously published data of 1994.
RESULTS: Response rate was 79% (81/102). Diffusion and acceptance of level 2 procedures increased significantly, except endometriosis and tubal surgery for infertility. Diffusion of LAVH was only 58%. Four percent of hysterectomies were LAVH. TLH and sacropexy were not performed. The diffusion of myomectomy increased significantly (p = 0.01), whereas its acceptance remained low.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the diffusion of operative procedures has increased over the last decade, acceptance is still limited, especially for laparoscopic hysterectomy. The implementation of operative gynaecological laparoscopy in The Netherlands seems to develop at a slow pace.
STUDY DESIGN: In 2003 a questionnaire was sent to all hospitals (n = 102), which addressed the total number and type of laparoscopic procedures performed in 2002 stratified by level of difficulty (level 1: diagnostic laparoscopy, sterilization, tubal patency tests; level 2: adhesiolysis, ectopic pregnancy (EP), laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis, cystectomy, oophorectomy, LAVH, tubal surgery for infertility; level 3: myomectomy, total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and sacropexy). Data were compared to previously published data of 1994.
RESULTS: Response rate was 79% (81/102). Diffusion and acceptance of level 2 procedures increased significantly, except endometriosis and tubal surgery for infertility. Diffusion of LAVH was only 58%. Four percent of hysterectomies were LAVH. TLH and sacropexy were not performed. The diffusion of myomectomy increased significantly (p = 0.01), whereas its acceptance remained low.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the diffusion of operative procedures has increased over the last decade, acceptance is still limited, especially for laparoscopic hysterectomy. The implementation of operative gynaecological laparoscopy in The Netherlands seems to develop at a slow pace.