We have located links that may give you full text access.
Individualized center-based analysis of urinary and sexual functional outcome after radical prostatectomy based on the prostate cancer outcome study: a post hoc pathway to patient outcome measurement analysis for quality improvement.
World Journal of Urology 2024 April 16
PURPOSE: We evaluate differences of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROM) based urinary continence and sexual function 12 months after radical prostatectomy (RPE) based on perioperative, surgical, and patient-specific characteristics in a large European academic urology center.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All men enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcome Study (PCO) study who were treated with RPE between 2017 and 2021 completed EPIC-26 information surveys before and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data of our institution. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the correlation between individual surgeons, patient characteristics, patient clinical data, and their urinary continence and sexual function.
RESULTS: In total, data of 429 men were analyzed: unstratified mean (SD) EPIC-26 domain score for urinary function decreased from 93.3 (0.7) to 60.4 (1.5) one year after RPE, respectively for sexual function from 64.95 (1.6) to 23.24 (1.1). Patients with preoperative adequate urinary function (EPIC-26 score > 80) reported significantly different mean urinary function scores between 53.35 (28.88) and 66.25 (25.15), p= 0.001, stratified by surgeons experience. On binary logistic regression analyses, only nerve sparing techniques (OR: 1,83, 95% CI: 1.01;3.21; p = 0.045) and low body mass index (OR: 0.91, CI: 0.85;0.99, p= 0.032) predicted adequate postoperative urinary function.
CONCLUSIONS: The results show how using provider-specific data from a larger cohort study enables to develop institution-specific analysis for functional outcomes after RPE. These models can be used for internal quality improvement as well as enhanced and provider-specific patient communication and shared decision making.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All men enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcome Study (PCO) study who were treated with RPE between 2017 and 2021 completed EPIC-26 information surveys before and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data of our institution. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the correlation between individual surgeons, patient characteristics, patient clinical data, and their urinary continence and sexual function.
RESULTS: In total, data of 429 men were analyzed: unstratified mean (SD) EPIC-26 domain score for urinary function decreased from 93.3 (0.7) to 60.4 (1.5) one year after RPE, respectively for sexual function from 64.95 (1.6) to 23.24 (1.1). Patients with preoperative adequate urinary function (EPIC-26 score > 80) reported significantly different mean urinary function scores between 53.35 (28.88) and 66.25 (25.15), p= 0.001, stratified by surgeons experience. On binary logistic regression analyses, only nerve sparing techniques (OR: 1,83, 95% CI: 1.01;3.21; p = 0.045) and low body mass index (OR: 0.91, CI: 0.85;0.99, p= 0.032) predicted adequate postoperative urinary function.
CONCLUSIONS: The results show how using provider-specific data from a larger cohort study enables to develop institution-specific analysis for functional outcomes after RPE. These models can be used for internal quality improvement as well as enhanced and provider-specific patient communication and shared decision making.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app