23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Extent, regional variation and impact of gynecologist payment models in routine pelvic examinations: a nationwide cross-sectional study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Based on moderate quality evidence, routine pelvic examination is strongly recommended against in asymptomatic women. The aims of this study was to quantify the extent of routine pelvic examinations within specialized health care in Norway, to assess if the use of these services differs across hospital referral regions and to assess if the use of colposcopy and ultrasound differs with gynecologists’ payment models.

          Methods

          Nationwide cross-sectional study including all women aged 18 years and older in Norway in the years 2014–16 (2,038,747). Data was extracted from the Norwegian Patient Registry and Statistics Norway. The main outcome measures were 1. The number of appointments per 1000 women with a primary diagnosis of “Encounter for gynecological examination without complaint, suspected or reported diagnosis.” 2. The age-standardized number of these appointments per 1000 women in the 21 different hospital referral regions of Norway. 3. The use of colposcopy and ultrasound in routine pelvic examinations, provided by gynecologists with fixed salaries and gynecologists paid by a fee-for-service model.

          Results

          Annually 22.2 out of every 1000 women in Norway had a routine pelvic examination, with variation across regions from 6.6 to 43.9 per 1000. Gynecologists with fixed salaries performed colposcopy in 1.6% and ultrasound in 74.5% of appointments. Corresponding numbers for fee-for-service gynecologists were 49.2% and 96.2%, respectively.

          Conclusions

          Routine pelvic examinations are widely performed in Norway. The variation across regions is extensive. Our results strongly indicate that fee-for-service payments for gynecologists skyrocket the use of colposcopy and increase the use of ultrasound in pelvic examinations of asymptomatic women.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12905-017-0471-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Screening for ovarian cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force reaffirmation recommendation statement.

          V Moyer, (2012)
          Reaffirmation of the 2004 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for ovarian cancer. A 2008 review of the literature commissioned by the USPSTF revealed no new evidence about the benefits of screening for ovarian cancer but provided some new data about observed harms of screening. A bridge search to 2011 focused on evidence from randomized, controlled trials. This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women. It does not apply to women with known genetic mutations that increase their risk for ovarian cancer (for example, BRCA mutations). The USPSTF recommends against screening for ovarian cancer in women (D recommendation).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Phasing out fee-for-service payment.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Tracking Medicine: A Researcher’s Quest to Understand Health Care

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ingvild.m.rosenlund@uit.no
                linda.leivseth@helse-nord.no
                ingard.nilsen@unn.no
                ohf000@post.uit.no
                arthur.revhaug@unn.no
                Journal
                BMC Womens Health
                BMC Womens Health
                BMC Women's Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6874
                21 November 2017
                21 November 2017
                2017
                : 17
                : 114
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000000122595234, GRID grid.10919.30, Department of Clinical Medicine, , UiT The Arctic University of Norway, ; Tromsø, Norway
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0519 4764, GRID grid.468644.c, Centre for Clinical Documentation and Evaluation, , Northern Norway Regional Health Authority, ; Tromsø, Norway
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 4689 5540, GRID grid.412244.5, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, , University Hospital of North Norway, ; Tromsø, Norway
                [4 ]ISNI 0000000122595234, GRID grid.10919.30, Department of Community Medicine, , UiT The Arctic University of Norway, ; Tromsø, Norway
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 4689 5540, GRID grid.412244.5, Division of Surgery, , Oncology and Women’s Health, University Hospital of North Norway, ; Tromsø, Norway
                Article
                471
                10.1186/s12905-017-0471-2
                5697055
                29162106
                c6dc97bb-205a-4ea6-a63d-80ae8e4c6353
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 15 September 2017
                : 13 November 2017
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                routine pelvic examination,unwarranted examination,fee-for-service,regional variation,ultrasonography,colposcopy

                Comments

                Comment on this article