Critical Review of Existing Patient Reported Outcome Measures After Male Anterior Urethroplasty

Abstract

Continued effort is necessary to develop a powerful instrument to assess patient reported outcomes after male urethroplasty. The importance of patient perspective is vital to understanding the success of open urethral reconstruction.

Urethroplasty and Quality of Life: Psychometric Validation of a Dutch Version of the Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient Reported Outcome Measures

“…Until 2011, reconstructive urology was lacking a validated tool to assess condition-specific as well as health-related quality of life before and after urethroplasty [13,26]. In light of this context, the International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaire and the American Urological Association Symptom Score questionnaire have been put forward, but these questionnaires are designed for men with BPH and are inadequate for patients with urethral strictures [12].…”

Psychometric validation of a German language version of a PROM for urethral stricture surgery and preliminary testing of supplementary ED and UI constructs

“…Consensual outcome measures in these patients are currently lacking [12], limiting direct comparisons which are key to improve quality of care. To date, the USS-PROM represents the only validated PROM tool [11].…”

“…Currently, only one validated PROM exists following male anterior urethroplasty evaluating voiding symptoms and HRQoL [11,12]. However, there is an urgent need for a German language version of the USS-PROM so it is accessible to people whose first language is not English.…”

“…In addition, men who undergo urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease are at great concern on erectile function and urinary incontinence. Unfortunately, the current USS-PROM does not address these healthcare outcomes, which is criticized by several authors [7,8,12,13].…”

Flexible Cystourethroscopy in the Follow-up of Posturethroplasty Patients and Characterisation of Recurrences

“…Most investigators use a combination of subjective and objective measures, as highlighted in the 2014 international consultation on urethral strictures [2]. Subjective measures include voiding history [3] or formal, symptom-based questionnaires [4][5][6]. Objective evaluation often entails measurement of urinary flow rate [7,8], contrast urethrography [9][10][11], or confirmation of urethral patency by calibration.…”