Skip to main content
Download PDF

Prevalence of hysterectomy and its determinants in northern Iran: enrollment results of the Tabari cohort study

BMC Women's Health volume 24, Article number: 502 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

To the best of our knowledge, no population-based studies have provided insights into the prevalence of hysterectomy and its risk factors among northern Iranian females. Thus, the present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and sociodemographic determinants of hysterectomy in a large cohort of northern Iranian females.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included data from the enrollment phase of the Tabari cohort study (TCS). The TCS consists of 10,255 adults (4,149 males and 6,106 females) aged 35–70 years who reside in Sari, Mazandaran, Iran, of which 6103 females were included in the study. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to search for hysterectomy determinants.

Results

Our results revealed that the prevalence of hysterectomy among northern Iranian females was 9.7% (595/6103). Additionally, 50–59 (OR: 4.63, 95% CI: 3.57–6.01) and 60–70 (OR: 5.83, 95% CI: 4.28–7.95) age groups, higher socioeconomic levels (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.13–2.42), a history of tubectomy (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.05–1.53), and more gravida (OR: 5.35, 95% CI: 1.62–17.63) were found to increase the odds of hysterectomy, whereas living in mountainous areas (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43–2.75) and having a job (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.45–0.86) were found to decrease the odds of hysterectomy.

Conclusion

Older age groups, living in urban areas, higher socioeconomic levels, not having a job, a history of tubectomy, and more gravida were found to increase the odds of hysterectomy.

Peer Review reports

Background

Hysterectomy, which is frequently performed in women, involves surgical removal of the uterus and can be classified as partial, total, or radical based on the extent of the operation [1]. Approximately 90% of these procedures address noncancerous gynecological conditions, including uterine fibroids, endometriosis, and pelvic organ prolapse [2]. This surgery provides symptom relief, prevents life-threatening conditions, and enhances quality of life. However, it is associated with risks such as surgical complications, extended recovery periods, hormonal imbalances, emotional effects, and other potential issues [3,4,5]. Thus, recognizing the prevalence and risk factors associated with hysterectomies is vital for identifying high-risk individuals, facilitating early intervention, and guiding healthcare planning and patient education to achieve optimal outcomes.

Understanding the potential consequences of an increase in hysterectomy incidence is critical. On the one hand, increased access to hysterectomies may lead to improved healthcare services, allowing more women to address debilitating gynecological conditions effectively. This could lead to enhanced quality of life, reduced morbidity from untreated conditions, and potentially even lower healthcare costs due to fewer hospital admissions for complications of untreated gynecological diseases [6,7,8].

On the other hand, a rise in hysterectomy rates could also signify overutilization of the procedure, possibly driven by factors such as socioeconomic disparities, variations in clinical practice, or lack of access to alternative treatments [9]. Hysterectomy has been associated with significant negative consequences, including increased risk of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, fractures, and mental health disorders, mostly due to estrogen and progesterone insufficiency, especially when performed at a relatively young age [10,11,12,13]. Additionally, there are concerns about the impact on fertility and incomplete family planning and the psychological effects of undergoing such life-altering surgery [13]. Therefore, while hysterectomy can be life-saving and improve the quality of life for many women, an unnecessary increase in its prevalence could have profound public health implications.

Various studies have assessed the prevalence of hysterectomy in different parts of the world for a variety of reasons. In a meta-analysis in 2023, the pooled incidence of emergency peripartum hysterectomy was estimated to be 1.1 per 1000 births, with the highest rates in lower- and middle-income nations [14]. However, a population-based study in Canada reported a prevalence of 15.4% in women with hysterectomy (WWH) [15], whereas in India, the prevalence was reported to be 11.35% [16]. Other studies conducted in other nations reported different results in terms of the prevalence of hysterectomy. Recent studies have shown a prevalence of 21.1% in the United States [1], 10% in Scotland [17], 10.4% in Denmark [18], and 9.7% in the United Kingdom [19]. Even within the same country, the prevalence of hysterectomy may differ across different provinces. For example, in India, the prevalence of hysterectomy was estimated to be 7.05% in West Bengal [20], 8.7% in Telangana, 4% in Gujarat, and 0.8% in Sikkim [21]. In Germany, the prevalence was 24.3% in Essen, 21.8% in Dortmund, 18.7% in Bavaria, and 10.8% in West Pomerania [22]. Thus, further research may be necessary to determine the prevalence of hysterectomies in other parts of the world, especially in lower- and middle-income countries (due to their possibly increased prevalence).

Additionally, some studies have delved into the determinants and predictors of hysterectomy. Rout et al. [16] suggested that urban residence, having a job, higher socioeconomic level, cancer, hypertension, and diabetes may be considered determinants of hysterectomy in India. However, Kumari et al. [21] reported that rural residence and older age were determinants of hysterectomy. Furthermore, age at menarche, triglyceride levels, education, and history of previous cesarean section were also found to be related to hysterectomy [23,24,25,26].

In addition to geographical variations, studies suggest that other variables, such as ethnicity and age, may also be involved in the significant differences in the prevalence of hysterectomies among different nations [27]. Unlike Brett et al. [28], Lawson et al. [29] reported that Hispanic women were more likely to undergo hysterectomy, whereas Bower et al. [30] reported that African-American women were more likely to undergo hysterectomy. In the Persian population, only a few studies have investigated the prevalence of hysterectomies, with many limitations in terms of study design and sample size. Among Iranian female adults, Jalalian et al. [31] reported a 3.8% prevalence among 150 women in Ilam Province, Gurtani et al. [32] reported an incidence of 1.39 per 1000 births in Isfahan Province, and Peivandi et al. [33] reported an incidence of 2.81 per 1000 births in Mazandaran Province. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have assessed the determinants and prevalence of hysterectomy on the basis of different demographic variables in Iran.

Despite numerous studies assessing the prevalence of hysterectomies in various countries, significant research gaps remain. Much of the literature has focused on Western populations, with limited attention given to Middle Eastern regions, including Iran. Studies in these regions are often hampered by small sample sizes, a lack of comprehensive data on sociodemographic determinants, and insufficient exploration of geographic variations within the same country. Furthermore, there is a paucity of research exploring the implications of hysterectomy prevalence in diverse socioeconomic and cultural contexts, which are likely to influence both the rates and outcomes of the procedure. Thus, the present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and sociodemographic determinants of hysterectomy in a large cohort of northern Iranian females.

Methods

Study design, setting, and participants

This study was conducted as a cross-sectional analysis of data from the recruitment phase of the TABARI cohort study (TCS), which is a subset of the larger Iranian national cohort study known as “Prospective Epidemiological Research Studies in Iran (PERSIAN). The enrollment phase of the TCS involved 10,255 participants (4,149 males and 6,106 females) between the ages of 35 and 70. These participants resided in the urban and mountainous areas of Sari, Mazandaran Province, in northern Iran. The enrollment phase took place from 2015–2017. The data were gathered via a census-based sampling approach and implemented through the TCS registration system. The researchers used a standardized questionnaire to collect demographic data, as outlined in the appropriate methodology and cohort profile articles [34,35,36]. The questionnaire was delivered by trained interviewers who had received national and provincial seminars. The administration was performed either in person or via standardized web-based platforms, following the PERSIAN cohort protocol. Please refer to the cohort profile and methodology papers for more comprehensive information on the PERSIAN and TCS techniques [34,35,36]. This study included the entire female population of the TCS, with the exception of people whose data were insufficient.

Variables and measurements

The investigation involved extracting demographic data from the TCS data repository. The data included demographic information such as age, residential area (urban or mountainous), marital status, socioeconomic status (ranging from lowest to highest), occupation, education level, physical activity (PA) level measured by metabolic equivalent (MET), and anthropometric assessments. Standardized instruments were used to collect anthropometric data, including height, weight, and body mass index (BMI). Height was measured via the SECA 226 stadiometer from SECA, a company based in Hamburg, Germany. Weights were recorded via the SECA 755 analog standing scale, also from the SECA Company. In addition, the TCS database captured data regarding whether participants had undergone hysterectomy and/or tubectomy procedures, as well as other obstetric factors such as age at menarche (AAM), age at which a woman becomes pregnant for the first time, and the number of pregnancies (Gravida) thus far.

Participants were eligible for inclusion in the TCS if they were female, between 35 and 70 years of age, and provided informed consent to participate in the study. Data from individuals who met these criteria were gathered via a census-based sampling approach from the TCS data registry and were included in the study regardless of their health status or previous medical history. For this specific analysis, since the aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of hysterectomy, all the subjects were included, with the exception of three female participants, who were excluded because of incomplete or missing data on key variables necessary for the analysis. Importantly, the broader TCS study initially had its own set of inclusion and exclusion criteria, which are detailed in the cohort profile and methodology papers [34,35,36].

Statistics

The statistical analysis was conducted via SPSS software version 26 (IBM SPSS Corp, United States). We initially computed descriptive statistics, including frequencies and percentages, to characterize the study population. The associations between different variables and the likelihood of undergoing a hysterectomy were first explored via univariate analysis, with the calculation of crude odds ratios (ORs) via logistic regression. Following the univariate analysis, multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders and to estimate adjusted ORs for hysterectomy. In this model, hysterectomy status (yes/no) was the dependent variable. The results are presented as ORs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and a P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Participant characteristics

The mean ages of the participants and WWH were 49.61 ± 9.24 and 44.01 ± 6.78 years, respectively. The overall prevalence of hysterectomy was 9.7% (595/6103). The majority of WWH were in the age group of 60–70 years. Approximately 72% of WWH were urban area residents. Approximately 66% of WWH belonged to middle and lower economic levels. Three-fifths of WWH had received less than 5 years of education or were illiterate. A significant 92% of WWH did not have a job with income. Furthermore, 86% of WWH were married. The menarche age was between 12 and 15 years for more than three-quarters of WWH patients. A history of tubectomy was reported in 53% of WWHs. According to the BMI criteria, 87% of WWH were classified as obese or overweight, and 56% of them were physically inactive. The age at first pregnancy for 53% of WWH was less than 20 years, and 50% of WWH had been pregnant five times or more (Table 1).

Table 1 Participants characteristics
Full size table

Risk factors for hysterectomy

A total of 6103 females were included in the study. Age was found to be a risk factor for undergoing hysterectomy, with women aged 60–70 years being 5.8 times more likely to undergo the procedure than those aged 35–39 years (OR = 5.83, 95% CI: 4.28–7.95, P < 0.001). Compared with urban residents, living in mountains decreased the chance of undergoing a hysterectomy by 53% (25-57%). Additionally, as the socioeconomic level rose, the chance of undergoing a hysterectomy followed a specific upward trend. The chance of hysterectomy was 1.66 times greater at socioeconomic level 5 than at level 1 (OR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.13–2.42, P = 0.009) (Table 2).

Table 2 Results of the multiple logistic regression model for risk factors of hysterectomy
Full size table

While the crude OR suggested a significant increase in the chance of hysterectomy on the basis of education level (e.g., illiterate participants compared with those with an academic education showed a more than threefold increase in the chance of hysterectomy (OR = 3.35, 95% CI: 2.38–4.71, P < 0.001) (Table 1), the adjusted OR did not yield a statistically significant effect. In the adjusted OR analysis, the observed slight increase in the chance of hysterectomy was not statistically significant, indicating a potential interaction effect based on this variable (e.g., more than 1.3 times greater for illiterate women than for those with an academic education (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 0.82–2.06, P = 0.262)) (Table 2).

Women with a job had a 38% (14-55%) lower chance of undergoing a hysterectomy than those who did not have a job. A history of tubectomy increased the chance of undergoing a hysterectomy by 1.27 times compared with women without this history (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.05–1.53, P = 0.015). The odds of undergoing a hysterectomy were greater for obese women than for those with a normal BMI according to the crude estimate (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.24–2.07, P < 0.001) (Table 1), but this was reversed in the adjusted OR estimate (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.69–1.22, P = 0.554) (Table 2).

There was no significant difference in the chance of undergoing a hysterectomy between women with sufficient and insufficient PA (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.79–1.19; P = 0.785). There was no causal association between pregnancy age and hysterectomy compared with the group without a history of pregnancy (e.g., in the group whose pregnancy occurred at the age of 30 years and above compared with the group without a history of pregnancy) (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.07–1.27, P = 0.103). As the number of pregnancies increased, the likelihood of undergoing a hysterectomy also increased. For example, women with a history of 5 or more pregnancies were 5.35 times more likely to have undergone a hysterectomy than those who had been pregnant only once or never (OR = 5.35, 95% CI: 1.62–17.63, P = 0.006) (Table 2).

Discussion

The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and sociodemographic determinants of hysterectomies in a large cohort of northern Iranian females. Our results revealed that the prevalence of hysterectomy in the studied population was 10%. Additionally, older age groups, living in urban areas, higher socioeconomic levels, not having a job, a history of tubectomy, and more gravida were found to increase the odds of hysterectomy.

To the best of our knowledge, no previous studies have evaluated the prevalence of hysterectomy in northern Iran. Our results revealed that 10% of the population had a history of hysterectomy, while the burden of this procedure was different in other nations and other provinces in Iran. Previous studies have shown a prevalence of 3.8% in Ilam Province [31] and 1.39 per 1000 births in Isfahan Province [32]. Some studies reported a prevalence of 15.4% in Canada [15], 21.1% in the USA [1], 13.35% in India [16], 10.4% in Denmark [18], 10% in Scotland [17], and 9.7% in the UK [19]. These differences may be due to residents of various ethnicities (such as the USA), differences in the average socioeconomic level of the nation, and differences in the level of health awareness among individuals.

Our results can be explained and interpreted in various ways. With respect to age, older women are more likely to develop gynecological conditions (e.g., fibroids, prolapse, and cancer) that necessitate hysterectomy [37]. Additionally, as women age and have reached the desired number of offspring, the decision to undergo a hysterectomy for nonlife-threatening conditions may become easier. Similar to our findings, Kumari et al. [21], Harvey et al. [1], Shekhar et al. [38], and Prusty et al. [25] also demonstrated that the odds of hysterectomy increase in older females. However, Rout et al. [16], Rajkumari et al. [23], and Kuppermann et al. [39] reported that age was not associated with the risk of hysterectomy, which may be due to differences in sample size, population ethnicity, and socioeconomic level.

Our results also revealed that participants living in urban areas are more likely to have undergone a hysterectomy. Urban residents typically have better access to healthcare facilities and specialists who can perform hysterectomies, and higher awareness and education levels in urban areas might lead to more frequent diagnoses and treatments [40, 41]. However, Chen et al. [24], Shekhar et al. [38], and Kumari et al. [21] reported that living in rural areas increases the odds of hysterectomy more than living in urban areas do. On the other hand, other studies, such as those of Desai et al. [42], Prusty et al. [25], and Rajkumari et al. [23], reported no difference between the two living areas in terms of the risk of hysterectomy. This may be due to different rural and urban living conditions in these study settings since the rural and mountainous areas of Mazandaran Province are very close to their urban areas.

In the present study and other studies by Prusty et al. [25], Shekhar et al. [38], and Kumari et al. [21], it was found that a higher socioeconomic level is associated with higher odds of hysterectomy, some papers have suggested otherwise. Desai et al. [42] and Kuppermann et al. [39] did not find any significant differences in the odds of hysterectomy between the lower, middle, and rich socioeconomic classes. These discrepancies may be due to different ethnicities, sample sizes, or different definitions of wealth in lower-, middle-, and high-income countries.

In the present study, occupation was also found to decrease the risk of hysterectomy. However, Prusty et al. [25] reported that having a job is associated with a greater risk of hysterectomy, whereas Kuppermann et al. [39] and Desai et al. [42] reported no difference. Our results may be explained by the association of unemployment with a greater burden of chronic conditions due to stress or a lack of preventive care, leading to a greater need for surgeries such as hysterectomy [43]. Additionally, unemployed individuals might access healthcare differently, potentially leading to delayed but more definitive treatments such as hysterectomy [44].

Implications for practice and/or policy

These findings highlight the need for a multifaceted approach to address the high prevalence of hysterectomies among women. By improving access to alternative treatments, supporting socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and increasing awareness and education, both healthcare practices and policies can be better aligned to reduce unnecessary hysterectomies and improve women’s health outcomes.

Strengths and limitations

The strengths of this study include its large, well-defined cohort from the Tabari Cohort Study, which provides a robust and representative sample of northern Iranian women. The use of comprehensive sociodemographic data allowed for a detailed analysis of the determinants of hysterectomy, contributing valuable insights to the limited body of research on this topic in the Middle East. However, the study also has limitations. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality between the identified determinants and hysterectomy. Additionally, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce recall bias, and the study’s findings may not be generalizable to other regions of Iran or different cultural contexts.

Conclusion

This study revealed a 10% prevalence of hysterectomy among women in northern Iran, with higher odds associated with older age, urban residence, higher socioeconomic status, unemployment, a history of tubectomy, and greater gravidity. These findings indicate that hysterectomy is influenced by specific demographic and reproductive factors, emphasizing the need for targeted public health strategies to address these risks. By understanding these determinants, healthcare planning can be better tailored to optimize outcomes for women at greater risk of undergoing this procedure.

Data availability

The data are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.

References

  1. Harvey SV, Pfeiffer RM, Landy R, Wentzensen N, Clarke MA. Trends and predictors of hysterectomy prevalence among women in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227(4):611. e1-. e12.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hakkarainen J, Nevala A, Tomás E, Nieminen K, Malila N, Pitkäniemi J, et al. Decreasing trend and changing indications of hysterectomy in Finland. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100(9):1722–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Beyan E, İnan AH, Emirdar V, Budak A, Tutar SO, Kanmaz AG. Comparison of the effects of total laparoscopic hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy on sexual function and quality of life. BioMed Research International. 2020;2020.

  4. Wenzel HH, Kruitwagen RF, Nijman HW, Bekkers RL, Van Gorp T, de Kroon CD, et al. Short-term surgical complications after radical hysterectomy—A nationwide cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(7):925–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Madueke-Laveaux OS, Elsharoud A, Al-Hendy A. What we know about the long-term risks of hysterectomy for Benign Indication—A systematic review. J Clin Med. 2021;10(22):5335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Rannestad T. Hysterectomy: effects on quality of life and psychological aspects. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynecology. 2005;19(3):419 – 30.

  7. Thakar R, Ayers S, Georgakapolou A, Clarkson P, Stanton S, Manyonda I. Hysterectomy improves quality of life and decreases psychiatric symptoms: a prospective and randomized comparison of total versus subtotal hysterectomy. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;111(10):1115–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Garry R. Health economics of hysterectomy. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynecology. 2005;19(3):451 – 65.

  9. Magon N, Divakar H, Kriplani A. The use, misuse, and abuse of hysterectomy. J Mid-Life Health. 2013;4(1):1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang Z, Li X, Zhang D. Impact of hysterectomy on cardiovascular disease and different subtypes: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022:1–9.

  11. Yuk J-S, Kim BG, Lee BK, Seo J, Kim GS, Min K, et al. Association of early hysterectomy with risk of cardiovascular disease in Korean women. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(6):e2317145–e.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu W, Wu W, Yang S, Chen T, Teng X, Gao D, et al. Risk of osteoporosis and fracture after hysterectomies without oophorectomies: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(8):1677–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chou P-H, Lin C-H, Cheng C, Chang C-L, Tsai C-J, Tsai C-P, et al. Risk of depressive disorders in women undergoing hysterectomy: a population-based follow-up study. J Psychiatr Res. 2015;68:186–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kallianidis AF, Rijntjes D, Brobbel C, Dekkers OM, Bloemenkamp KWM, van den Akker T, Incidence. Indications, risk factors, and outcomes of emergency Peripartum Hysterectomy Worldwide: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2023;141(1):35–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Scime NV, Brown HK, Metcalfe A, Brennand EA. Prevalence of hysterectomy by self-reported disability among Canadian women: findings from a national cross-sectional survey. Women’s Health Rep. 2021;2(1):557–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rout D, Sinha A, Palo SK, Kanungo S, Pati S. Prevalence and determinants of hysterectomy in India. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):14569.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Ruiz de Azua Unzurrunzaga G, Brewster DH, Wild SH, Sivalingam VN. Declining hysterectomy prevalence and the estimated impact on uterine cancer incidence in Scotland. Cancer Epidemiol. 2019;59:227–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Settnes A, Jorgensen T. Hysterectomy in a Danish cohort. Prevalence, incidence and sociodemographic characteristics. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1996;75(3):274–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Redburn JC, Murphy MFG. Hysterectomy prevalence and adjusted cervical and uterine cancer rates in England and Wales. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;108(4):388–95.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Biswas S, Keshri R, Bala B. Prevalence and outcome of hysterectomy in a peripheral medical college–A data-based retrospective study. Asian J Med Sci. 2022;13(4):118–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kumari P, Kundu J. Prevalence, sociodemographic determinants, and self-reported reasons for hysterectomy and choice of hospitalization in India. BMC Womens Health. 2022;22(1):514.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Stang A, Kluttig A, Moebus S, Völzke H, Berger K, Greiser KH, et al. Educational level, prevalence of hysterectomy, and age at amenorrhoea: a cross-sectional analysis of 9536 women from six population-based cohort studies in Germany. BMC Womens Health. 2014;14:10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Rajkumari S, Chaudhary V, Kasaudhan S, Saraswathy KN. Incidence and determinants of hysterectomy among north Indian women: an 8-year follow-up study. Front Public Health. 2022;10:1065081.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen I, Wise MR, Dunn S, Anderson G, Degani N, Lefebvre G, et al. Social and Geographic determinants of Hysterectomy in Ontario: a Population-based retrospective cross-sectional analysis. J Obstet Gynecol Can. 2017;39(10):861–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Prusty RK, Choithani C, Gupta SD. Predictors of hysterectomy among married women 15–49 years in India. Reprod Health. 2018;15(1):3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Parazzini F, Ricci E, Cipriani S, Chiaffarino F, Bortolus R, Chiantera V, et al. Temporal trends and determinants of peripartum hysterectomy in Lombardy, Northern Italy, 1996–2010. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(2):223–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McClurg A, Wong J, Louie M. The impact of race on hysterectomy for benign indications. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2020;32(4):263–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brett KM, Higgins JA. Hysterectomy prevalence by hispanic ethnicity: evidence from a National Survey. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(2):307–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lawson SM, Chou B, Martin KL, Ryan I, Eke AC, Martin KD. The association between race/ethnicity and peripartum hysterectomy and the risk of perioperative complications. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2020;151(1):57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bower JK, Schreiner PJ, Sternfeld B, Lewis CE. Black–white differences in Hysterectomy Prevalence: the CARDIA Study. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(2):300–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Jalilian A, Valizadeh R, Rashidbeygi M, Mohammed Hassan Nahal M, Shafieian M, Marzban R, et al. Predictive factors of hysterectomy in the City of Ilam: the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve model approach. Int J Med Invest. 2015;4(3):333–7.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gurtani FM, Fadaei B, Akbari M. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy in Isfahan; maternal mortality and morbidity rates among the women who underwent peripartum hysterectomy. Adv Biomedical Res. 2013;2(1):20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Peivandi S, Peivandi S, Habibi A, Atarod Z, Moosazadeh M, Fallah S. Prevalence and Factors Associated with Peripartum Hysterectomy among Iranian pregnant women: a retrospective study. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2022;32(2):289–96.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Eghtesad S, Mohammadi Z, Shayanrad A, Faramarzi E, Joukar F, Hamzeh B, et al. The PERSIAN cohort: providing the evidence needed for healthcare reform. Arch Iran Med. 2017;20(11):691–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Poustchi H, Eghtesad S, Kamangar F, Etemadi A, Keshtkar A-A, Hekmatdoost A, et al. Prospective epidemiological research studies in Iran (the PERSIAN Cohort Study): rationale, objectives, and design. Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(4):647–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kheradmand M, Moosazadeh M, Saeedi M, Poustchi H, Eghtesad S, Esmaeili R et al. Tabari cohort profile and preliminary results in urban areas and mountainous regions of Mazandaran, Iran. 2019.

  37. Tambvekar SE, Adki S, Sheriar NK. Pregnancies in Elderly mothers over 40 years: what to expect from the Rising New Age High-Risk Cohort? J Obstet Gynecol India. 2023;73(4):358–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Shekhar C, Paswan B, Singh A. Prevalence, sociodemographic determinants and self-reported reasons for hysterectomy in India. Reprod Health. 2019;16(1):118.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Kuppermann M, Learman LA, Schembri M, Gregorich SE, Jackson R, Jacoby A, et al. Predictors of hysterectomy use and satisfaction. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(3):543–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Reilly M. Health disparities and Access to Healthcare in Rural vs. Urban Areas. Theory Action. 2021;14(2).

  41. Cyr ME, Etchin AG, Guthrie BJ, Benneyan JC. Access to specialty healthcare in urban versus rural US populations: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Desai S, Campbell OM, Sinha T, Mahal A, Cousens S. Incidence and determinants of hysterectomy in a low-income setting in Gujarat, India. Health Policy Plan. 2017;32(1):68–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sumner RC, Gallagher S. Unemployment as a chronic stressor: a systematic review of cortisol studies. Psychol Health. 2017;32(3):289–311.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ilić B, Ledinski Fičko S, Hošnjak AM, Kovačević I, Smrekar M, Sedić B. Unemployment and Access to Health Care. Croatian Nurs J. 2019;3(2):183–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the members of PERSIAN and TABARI cohort study (Ministry of Health and Medical Education and Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences) for all they did for this program.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gastrointestitional Cancer Research Center, Non- Communicable Disease Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, P.O.BOX: 4816117949, Iran

    Mahmood Moosazadeh & Erfan Ghadirzadeh

  2. Epidemiology Health Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

    Mehran Asadi-Aliabadi

  3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

    Maliheh Ghasemi Tirtashi

  4. Student Research Committee, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

    Mohammadmehdi Pejman

  5. Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Razi Hospital, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

    Mobina Gheibi

Authors
  1. Mahmood Moosazadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehran Asadi-Aliabadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maliheh Ghasemi Tirtashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammadmehdi Pejman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mobina Gheibi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Erfan Ghadirzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: MM and MGT; Data curation: MP, MM and MG; Formal analysis: MM and MAA; Methodology: EG and MM; Project administration: MM and EG; Resources: MM; Software: MM, EG, and MG; Supervision: MGT and MM; Validation: MGT and MAA; Visualization: EG and MG; Writing–original draft: EG and MP; Writing–review & editing: All authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mehran Asadi-Aliabadi or Erfan Ghadirzadeh.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was conducted without commercial input or involvement in the design, implementation, analysis, or reporting. The Tabari Cohort Study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences (Ethics Approval Code: IR.MAZUMS.REC.95.2524). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants before they entered the study. All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Research Ethics Committee of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moosazadeh, M., Asadi-Aliabadi, M., Ghasemi Tirtashi, M. et al. Prevalence of hysterectomy and its determinants in northern Iran: enrollment results of the Tabari cohort study. BMC Women's Health 24, 502 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-024-03338-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-024-03338-y

Keywords

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

Contact us