No abstract

Purpose:A fresh post-vasectomy semen analysis showing 100,000 nonmotile sperm/mL or less confirms sterility. Mailed sample or self-testing at home with SpermCheck® Vasectomy decreases the inconvenience of producing a fresh sample, but without assessing motility. We evaluated if there is a sperm concentration under which no motile sperm are observed that could fortify the use of these alternatives.Materials and Methods:We conducted a study of post-vasectomy semen analyses performed at the andrology laboratory of the Quebec City university hospital, Canada. Sperm concentration and motility were assessed on fresh noncentrifuged 10 µL samples at 400× magnification. We calculated the proportion of post-vasectomy semen analysis showing motile sperm according to sperm concentration for all and first prescribed post-vasectomy semen analysis by the 5 physicians who performed the most vasectomies.Results:We identified 6,492 post-vasectomy semen analyses prescribed by 169 physicians. The 5 vasectomists prescribed 95.6% (6,204) of the post-vasectomy semen analyses; 96.1% (5,965) were first tests. We observed motility in all sperm concentration strata but it decreased with lower concentrations. At the first post-vasectomy semen analysis, among patients with less than 1 million, 250,000 and 100,000 sperm/mL, 0.5% (27/5,842) and 0.3% (19/5,760 and 17/5,725) had motility, respectively.Conclusions:If the first post-vasectomy semen analysis on a mailed sample shows less than 1 million sperm/mL, we recommend requesting an additional mailed sample instead of a fresh sample. SpermCheck Vasectomy could falsely indicate a successful vasectomy in a very small proportion of cases. The optimal post-vasectomy semen analysis strategy must involve shared decision making, balancing the inconvenience of providing a fresh sample with the risk of a false-negative result.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives Our aim was to compare some of the health outcomes and costs associated with value of care in emergency departments (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory patients presenting with an acute respiratory disease. Methods A health records review was conducted from April 2016 through March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ambulatory patients at least 18 years old, (ii) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or walk-in clinic within three and seven days of the index visit. Secondary outcomes were the mean cost of care and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients. The cost of care was estimated from the Ministry of Health's perspectives using time-driven activity-based costing. ResultsThe ED group included 170 patients and the walk-in clinic group 326 patients. The return visit incidences at three and seven days were, respectively, 25.9% and 38.2% in the ED vs. 4.9% and 14.7% in the walk-in clinic (adjusted relative risk (arr) of 4.7 (95% CI 2.6-8.6) and 2.7 (1.9-3.9)). The mean cost ($Cdn) of the index visit care was 116.0 (106.3-125.7) in the ED vs. 62.5 (57.7-67.3) in the walk-in clinic (mean difference of 56.4 (45.7-67.1)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was 5.6% in the ED vs. 24.7% in the walk-in clinic (arr 0.2, 0.01-0.6). Conclusions This study is the first in a larger research program to compare the value of care between walk-in clinics and the ED. The potential advantages of walk-in clinics over EDs (lower costs, lower incidence of return visits) for ambulatory patients with respiratory diseases should be considered in healthcare planning. KeywordsValue of care • Health outcomes • Respiratory diseases • Outpatient visit • Emergency department • Return visits • Cost of care The results of this study were presented as a Poster at the annual conference of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), in Québec on May 30, 2022.