Abstract
Introduction: A description is given of the quality of life (QOL) of women who were treated with peripartum embolization or hysterectomy for major obstetric hemorrhage (MOH).
Methods: Questionnaires assessing QOL, combined with questionnaires and drawings assessing illness perceptions, were used to compare women with MOH to reference groups provided by the questionnaires.
Results: Women who experienced MOH have similar scores on QOL questionnaires compared to reference groups. Women treated with arterial embolization scored better than women treated with hysterectomy. Partners of women with MOH scored better on QOL questionnaires than reference groups. Drawings reflect the major emotional impact of MOH.
Discussion: MOH does not seem to have a negative effect on QOL 6–8 years after the event, although drawings and verbalizations indicate major emotional impact. More extensive follow-up is advised for early recognition of the need for psychological help. Women after embolization seem to have better QOL compared to women after hysterectomy.
Acknowledgements
We thank the women and their partners for their collaboration in this study. We would like to acknowledge Prof. Sicco Scherjon MD for initiating the research on QOL after MOH.
Disclosure statement
None of the authors report any conflict of interest. No funding was received for this study. There was no involvement of a pharmaceutical or other company.
Women who were treated with embolization of the uterine artery for MOH show good QOL, years after the event.
Although MOH has a big impact, good QOL could be the result of “benefit finding”.
Illness perceptions influence QOL.
Current knowledge on the subject
Women who were treated with embolization of the uterine artery for MOH show better QOL than women who were treated with hysterectomy.
Partners of women who experienced MOH have comparable QOL as reference groups.
More extensive follow-up may be beneficial for some couples.