Advancing Patient-Centered Outcomes in Ambulatory Gynecology: A Comparative Study of Office-Based and Hospital-Based Procedures in Managing Benign Gynecologic Conditions

Background: Ambulatory gynecology has emerged as a transformative approach in managing benign gynecologic conditions by shifting procedures from hospitals to office-based settings. Despite its growing adoption, comparative evidence on patient-centered outcomes, procedural safety, and cost-effectiveness between these models remains limited, creating a gap in evidence-based clinical guidance. Objective: This study aimed to compare office-based and hospital-based procedures in the treatment of benign gynecologic conditions, focusing on patient satisfaction, recovery time, complication rates, and procedural costs to assess their effectiveness and clinical value. Methods: A comparative observational study was conducted among women (n = 56) undergoing minimally invasive treatment for benign gynecologic conditions such as abnormal uterine bleeding, leiomyoma, or endometrial polyps. Participants were identified through clinical records and invited to complete an online, anonymized survey assessing satisfaction, recovery, and complications. Inclusion criteria included adult women treated within the last six months, while those with suspected malignancy or emergency interventions were excluded. Ethical approval was obtained per the Declaration of Helsinki. Data were analyzed using SPSS v27, employing independent t-tests, chi-square tests, and effect size calculations. Results: Office-based procedures were associated with significantly higher satisfaction (4.64 ± 0.49 vs. 4.17 ± 0.70; p = 0.006), shorter recovery time (4.7 ± 1.6 vs. 7.4 ± 2.1 days; p < 0.001), and lower costs (USD 1,230 ± 210 vs. USD 2,870 ± 390; p < 0.001), with no increase in complication rates (7.1% vs. 10.7%; p = 0.64). Conclusion: Office-based gynecologic procedures offer a safe, cost-effective, and patient-centered alternative to hospital-based care for benign conditions, supporting their integration into routine practice to improve access, efficiency, and quality of care.