Rates of medical or surgical treatment for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: the ECLIPSE trial 10-year observational follow-up study

Abstract

Background Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can significantly affect women’s lives until menopause. There is a lack of evidence on longer-term outcomes after seeking health care and treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. Objectives To assess the continuation rates of medical treatments and the rates of ablative and surgical interventions among women who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial (ISRCTN86566246) 10 years after initial management for heavy menstrual bleeding in primary care. To explore experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding and influences on treatment for women. Design This was a prospective observational cohort study, with a parallel qualitative study. Setting Primary care. Participants A total of 206 women with heavy menstrual bleeding who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial consented to providing outcome data via a questionnaire approximately 10 years after original randomisation. Their mean age at follow-up was 54 years (standard deviation 5 years). A purposeful sample of 36 women also participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Interventions The ECLIPSE trial randomised participants to either the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (52 mg) or the usual medical treatment (oral tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen–progestogen or progesterone alone, chosen as clinically appropriate by general practitioners and women). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures were rates of ablative and surgical treatments; the rate of continuation of medical treatments; and quality of life using the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and EuroQol-5 Dimensions; women’s experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding; and the influences on their decisions around treatment. Results Over the 10-year follow-up period, 60 out of 206 (29%) women had received a surgical intervention [hysterectomy, n = 34 (17%); endometrial ablation, n = 26 (13%)]. Between 5 and 10 years post trial intervention, 89 women (43%) had ceased all medical treatments and 88 (43%) were using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system alone or in combination with other oral treatments. More women in the usual medical treatment group had also used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system than women in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group. Fifty-six women (28%) used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system at 10 years. There was no statistically significant difference in generic quality-of-life scores between the two original trial groups, although small improvements in the majority of domains were seen in both groups across time. Women reported wide-ranging impacts on their quality of life and normalisation of their heavy menstrual bleeding experience as a result of the taboo around menstruation. Women’s treatment decisions and experiences were influenced by the perceived quality of health-care interactions with clinicians and their climacteric status. Limitations Fewer than half of the original 571 participants participated; however, the cohort was clinically and demographically representative of the original trial population. Conclusions Medical treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding can be initiated in primary care, with low rates of surgical intervention and improvement in quality of life observed 10 years later. Clinicians should be aware of the considerable challenges that women with heavy menstrual bleeding experience at presentation and subsequently over time, and the importance and value to women of patient-centred communication in this context. Future work Any further evaluation of treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding should include long-term evaluation of outcomes and adherence. Trial registration The original ECLIPSE trial was registered as ISRCTN86566246. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 17. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.