Table 2. Multivariate analysis of influencing factors on organization and professional level.

Variables					Never, rarely, half the time	Usually, always	Univariate analysis		Multivariate analysis
							OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value
Gynecologists (n=301)
	Discuss the OS in case of:
		Abdominal hysterectomy	Type of institution	Non-training hospital	14	83	1		1
				Training hospital	52	144	0.47 (0.24–0.89)	0.02	0.43 (0.23–0.83)	0.01
			Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	33	83	1		1
				Yes	33	144	1.74 (1.00–3.02)	0.05	1.89 (1.08–3.33)	0.03
		Laparoscopic hysterectomy	Type of institution	Non-training hospital	18	77	1		1
				Training hospital	76	119	0.37 (0.20–0.66)	0.00	0.37 (0.20–0.66)	0.00
		Vaginal hysterectomy	Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	90	19	1		1
				Yes	96	46	2.27 (1.24–4.17)	0.01	2.07 (1.10–3.88)	0.02
			Work experience (yr)		10 (6–16)	17 (9–24)	1.07 (1.03–1.11)	0.00	1.08 (1.04–1.12)	0.00
			Vaginal hysterectomies a year		8 (3–15)	7 (2–10)	0.97 (0.94–1.01)	0.12	0.96 (0.93–0.99)	0.04
		Benign gynecological laparoscopy	No. of hysterectomies a year		30 (20–40)	30 (25–40)	1.01 (1.00–1.02)	0.15	1.01 (1.00–1.03)	0.04
		Sterilization	Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	94	21	1		1
				Yes	98	60	2.74 (1.55–4.86)	0.00	2.74 (1.54–4.86)	0.00
	Perform the OS in case of:
		Abdominal hysterectomy	Type of institution	Non-training hospital	18	77	1		1
				Training hospital	76	119	0.37 (0.20–0.66)	0.00	0.37 (0.20–0.66)	0.00
		Laparoscopic hysterectomy	Type of institution	Non-training hospital	15	72	1		1
				Training hospital	66	112	0.35 (0.19–0.67)	0.00	0.35 (0.19–0.67)	0.00
		Vaginal hysterectomy	Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	90	19	1		1
				Yes	96	46	4.86 (1.61–14.64)	0.01	4.30 (1.39–13.33)	0.01
			Work experience (yr)		11 (6–18)	20 (13–27)	1.12 (1.06–1.18)	0.00	1.11 (1.05–1.17)	0.00
		Benign gynecological laparotomy	Work experience (yr)		11 (6–17)	14.5 (8–24)	1.12 (1.06–1.18)	0.00	1.05 (1.01–1.10)	0.01
			Special interest in oncology	No	129	45	1		1
				Yes	71	33	2.40 (1.04–5.56)	0.00	2.90 (1.52–5.54)	0.00
		Benign gynecological laparoscopy	Work experience (yr)		11 (6–18)	14 (9–24)	1.05 (1.01–1.09)	0.01	1.05 (1.01–1.09)	0.02
			Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	102	10	1		1
				Yes	132	34	2.55 (1.24–5.25)	0.01	2.48 (1.16–5.28)	0.02
		Sterilization	Type of institution	Non-training hospital	79	16	1		1
				Training hospital	160	18	0.56 (0.27–1.15)	0.11	0.41 (0.19–0.89)	0.02
			Work experience (yr)		10 (6–18)	16 (8–25)	1.07 (1.02–1.12)	0.00	1.08 (1.03–1.12)	0.00
			Special interest in oncology	No	161	15	1		1
				Yes	78	19	2.62 (1.26–5.42)	0.01	2.87 (1.34–6.17)	0.01
Gynecology trainees (n=142)
	Discuss the OS in case of:
		Benign gynecological laparotomy	Knowledge of current literature, not just the hypothesis	No	59	6	1		1
				Yes	33	12	3.58 (1.23–10.41)	0.02	3.58 (1.23–10.41)	0.02

Values are presented as number or median (interquartile range).

CI, confidence interval; OR odds ratio; OS, opportunistic salpingectomy.