Patient-reported outcome measures in urology

Narang, Gopal; Pannell, Stephanie C.; Laviana, Aaron A.; Huen, Kathy H.; Izard, Jason; Smith, Angela; Bergman, Jonathan

doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000000412

Cited by 35 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another limitation is the definition of success after 12 and 24 months follow‐up. Patient‐reported outcomes are difficult to define, resulting in a wide variety of instruments to assess these . It has been shown that there is a high association between patient‐reported outcome measures of quality of health and bladder diaries in patients with overactive bladder .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sacral neuromodulation using the standardized tined lead implantation technique with a curved vs a straight stylet: 2‐year clinical outcomes and sensory responses to lead stimulation

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess clinical follow‐up data over 24 months, comparing the use of a curved vs straight stylet in patients undergoing sacral neuromodulation using the standardized tined lead implantation technique. Patients and Methods We conducted a single tertiary‐centre, prospective study between August 2013 and June 2015 involving 40 patients with overactive bladder and 15 with non‐obstructive urinary retention refractory to first‐line treatment. The primary outcome was successful tined lead procedure according to intention‐to‐treat analyses at 12 and 24 months. The secondary outcome was number of optimal electrode configurations during programming. Statistical analysis was performed using plain non‐parametric tests for numerical and categorical data. Results Successful tined lead procedures were achieved in 33 of 35 patients (94%) implanted with the curved stylet compared with 13 of 20 patients (65%) implanted with the straight stylet (P = 0.005). Intention‐to‐treat analyses at 12 and 24 months showed success rates of 94% and 91%, respectively, in the curved stylet group vs 65% and 45%, respectively, in the straight stylet group (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001). In the curved stylet group, 60% and 25% of the electrode configurations were considered optimal and poor, respectively, vs 40% and 37%, respectively, in the straight stylet group (P < 0.001). Conclusions The use of the standardized implantation technique with the curved stylet led to more successful tined lead procedures, better success rates after 2 years of follow‐up and a greater number of optimal electrode configurations when compared to use of the straight stylet.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sacral neuromodulation using the standardized tined lead implantation technique with a curved vs a straight stylet: 2‐year clinical outcomes and sensory responses to lead stimulation

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Implementation of PROMs has transitioned from being primarily descriptive in nature to producing actionable findings. 19 Healthcare policy-makers now rely on these measures to determine whether specific procedures are worthwhile supporting and to compare outcomes between institutions. 20 Our findings can be used to ensure adequate counselling about TTPM-biopsies and point to a need for strategies such as mpMRI and targeted biopsies to minimize harms of TTPM-biopsy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping Biopsies in the PICTURE Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy causes a high urinary retention rate and a detrimental impact on genitourinary functional outcomes, including deterioration in urinary flow and sexual function. Our findings can be used to ensure adequate counseling about transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies. The results point to a need for strategies such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsies to minimize the harms of transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy.

show abstract

“…Value based healthcare and PROMs and PREMs are also considered important in urology. However, PROMs and PREMs for urolithiasis fall behind [10]. To demonstrate: in 2010 there were 16 validated instruments for prostate cancer, 11 for benign prostate hyperplasia and 24 for urinary incontinence [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for Dutch urolithiasis patients

Jacobs¹,

Weltings

Pelger

et al. 2020

Tijdschr Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring quality of care with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) is becoming increasingly important. With this study we evaluated ESWL and URS treatments with PROMs/PREMs and gained experience with the execution and implementation of PROMs/PREMs in daily practice. A longitudinal survey study was performed with ESWL and URS urolithiasis patients, using a questionnaire directly (T0-response 69.8%, n = 51) and 10 days after treatment (T1-response 56%, n = 42). Problems on performing daily activities were experienced by 54.2% of ESWL and 61.1% of URS-patients. In the two weeks after treatment 45.8% of the ESWL group and 70.6% of the URS-patients uses pain medication. URS-patients miss more workdays (5.61 versus 1.26 p = 0.025). Patient satisfaction is similar in both groups. With this study we have made a start with PROMs and PREMs for urolithiasis patients. It shows that urolithiasis treatment has influence on patient's life. More knowledge in this area will improve shared decision making.

show abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures in urology

Abstract: PROMs are effective tools for characterizing symptom burden and health-related quality of life. With increasing clinical implementation, PROMs are playing an increasing role in patients' clinical decision-making.

Cited by 35 publications

References 81 publications

Sacral neuromodulation using the standardized tined lead implantation technique with a curved vs a straight stylet: 2‐year clinical outcomes and sensory responses to lead stimulation

Sacral neuromodulation using the standardized tined lead implantation technique with a curved vs a straight stylet: 2‐year clinical outcomes and sensory responses to lead stimulation

Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping Biopsies in the PICTURE Study

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for Dutch urolithiasis patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About