Development and validation of the Value of Uterus instrument and visual analog scale to measure patients' valuation of their uterus

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Nov;227(5):746.e1-746.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.029. Epub 2022 Jun 25.

Abstract

Background: Currently, there are no clear frameworks or tools to objectively or subjectively evaluate patient attitudes toward uterine preservation and how they influence the decision to proceed with hysterectomy vs uterine preservation when undergoing prolapse surgery.

Objective: This study aimed to develop a reliable and valid instrument to measure patients' valuation of their uterus.

Study design: The Value of Uterus instrument was developed on the basis of existing literature and created with structured patient-reported outcome measurement development methodology. An initial 14-question instrument was administered to 152 patients, and the instrument was revised on the basis of an analysis of internal consistency. The resulting Value of Uterus instrument has 6 items and includes a visual analog scale for the question "How important is it to you to keep your uterus when you have a gynecologic condition?" To validate the instrument, we recruited 51 patients aged >45 years with uterovaginal prolapse who presented to the urogynecology department and were scheduled to undergo vaginal surgery with or without hysterectomy. Internal reliability of the instrument was measured with Cronbach alpha. For known-groups validity, Value of Uterus summary scores were compared between women who underwent hysteropexy and those who underwent hysterectomy using the t test. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess test-retest reliability with Value of Uterus administered to women twice. Lastly, a receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted to identify a cutoff Value of Uterus and visual analog scale score for predicting whether a woman would undergo hysteropexy (vs hysterectomy).

Results: A total of 51 patients were recruited (26 patients in the hysterectomy and 25 in the hysteropexy group), with a mean age of 64±10 years; 87.8% of patients self-identified as White. There were no differences in demographics between the groups. Cronbach's alpha was 0.94, suggesting excellent internal consistency of the items in the Value of Uterus instrument. The Value of Uterus instrument was highly correlated with the visual analog scale question, with r=0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.89; P<.001). Patients in the hysteropexy group had significantly higher Value of Uterus scores (indicating greater value placed on the uterus) than women who underwent hysterectomy (20.8 vs 12.2; P<.001). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis identified a Value of Uterus cutoff score ≥14, with good accuracy for predicting hysteropexy (area under the curve, 0.87; sensitivity, 92.0%; specificity, 68%).

Conclusion: Value of Uterus is a reliable and valid 6-item instrument that measures patients' valuation of the uterus and preferences for uterine preservation when undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Value of Uterus and visual analog scale were shown to reliably predict whether a patient undergoes uterine-preserving prolapse surgery. The Value of Uterus instrument and visual analog scale tool can be useful tools to ensure that the patient's preferences are included in the medical decision-making. Value of Uterus may be useful for future research in other gynecologic conditions where uterine preservation is an option.

Keywords: hysterectomy; hysteropexy; prolapse repair; prolapse surgery; uterine preservation.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Female
  • Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / methods
  • Humans
  • Hysterectomy / methods
  • Middle Aged
  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse* / surgery
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Uterine Prolapse* / surgery
  • Uterus / surgery
  • Visual Analog Scale