Comparison of direct and indirect costs of abnormal uterine bleeding treatment with global endometrial ablation and hysterectomy

Aim: The objective was to compare abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) direct healthcare costs and indirect work absence or short-term disability costs associated with treatment with second-generation global endometrial ablation (GEA) or hysterectomy.

Methods: Women aged 30-55 years with AUB who underwent GEA or hysterectomy during 2006-2010 were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan(®) Commercial and Health and Productivity Management databases.

Results & conclusion: Two-thirds (66.3%) of the 61,602 study patients underwent GEA compared with hysterectomy (33.7%). Hysterectomy patients had higher treatment costs (US$12,147 vs 5837; p < 0.001), higher annual absenteeism costs (US$7543 vs 5621; p < 0.001), were four-times more likely to have a short-term disability claim (84 vs 21%; p < 0.001) and had higher per-patient short-term disability costs (US$5744 vs 1361; p < 0.001). Overall hysterectomy costs were approximately twice those of GEA.