RESULTS
A total of 300 women participated in this study. Of those, 150 were patients that presented at our institution during an administrative or a medical appointment (admission, preoperative evaluation for gynecologic surgery, or preoperative preparation) prior to undergoing scheduled hysterectomy. The remaining 150 participants were women that were approached and interviewed at our institution (companion or passerby), agreed to participate, and were not undergoing a surgical procedure. All interviews were included in the analysis. Demographic data of study participants are shown in Table 1 (Sociodemographic characteristics of the study population ) .
In the first section of the interview, participants ranked -based on their preferences- from most to least important 12 items; 6 considered as advantages of AH, and 6 items considered as advantages of LH. As shown in Figure 1 (Advantages of abdominal and laparoscopic hysterectomy ranked and scored by all participants ) , the three most relevant variables for all interviewed participants were: experiencing less pain, lower complication rate, and use of a surgical technique that allows proper visualization of the abdominopelvic cavity. On the other hand, the least important items were: required training time for surgeons to safely perform a given technique, cost of procedure, and the fact that the procedure could be performed using conductive anesthesia.
In the second section of the questionnaire, a total of 10 items –5 advantages of LH, and 5 of VH- were ranked by each participant. As shown in Figure 2 (Advantages of vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy ranked and scored by all participants) , the three most relevant items for all interviewed women were: less pain, less bleeding, and proper visualization of the abdominopelvic cavity during the procedure. On the other hand, the least important items were: less training time for surgeons, cost of procedure, and that the technique does not necessarily require general anesthesia.
Results of the third question of our survey, which listed 7 items that were selected by the authors as being the most relevant, independently of the surgical technique they represented, are shown in Figure 3 (Most relevant factors, selected by physicians, ranked and scored by all participants).
Data collected from the group of women undergoing hysterectomy (n=150) were analyzed and compared with those from the control group – women who were not undergoing any surgical procedure ( Table 2.Comparison of scores according to imminence of hysterectomy ). A median test showed a statistically significant difference (p < .05) in age of participants between groups. Participants scheduled to undergo hysterectomy were older, with a mean age of 43 years (SD 6.9), while participants of the control group exhibited a mean age of 35 years (SD 10.2). For the younger group, the size of the scar was ranked as the most important item in question 1 (p = .002) and question 3 (p = .01). On the other hand, for patients undergoing hysterectomy the fact that the abdominopelvic cavity could be properly visualized during the procedure was ranked as most important (p=.008).
Participants were grouped by educational level into two groups: secondary education or below, and those with technical education or above (Table 3 . Comparison of scores according to participant educational level ). Our results show that, when comparing AH with LH, women with higher education ranked as most important a technique that resulted in lower complication rates (p=.006), while participants with lower educational level ranked as most important a faster return to daily activities (shorter sick leave) (p=.045), a lower cost (p=.037), and being the most available technique at all levels of care (p=.001).
Regarding advantages of VH and LH, our results show that for women with lower educational level the lower cost of the procedure (p=.026) was the most important item.
In regards to question 3, women with higher educational level considered most important procedure safety (p=.005), while participants with a lower educational level ranked a faster recovery time as most important (p=.005).