JAAPA : official journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants · 2026
PA- versus urologist-performed flexible cystoscopy: A comparative study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Misurka James, Berjaoui Mohamad B, Lajkosz Katherine, Cockburn Jess, Kot Dhiral, Hamilton Robert J, Kulkarni Girish S, Zlotta Alexandre R, Lee Jason Y, Perlis Nathan, Finelli Antonio, Fleshner Neil E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare patient pain perceptions and bladder cancer detection rates following cystoscopy performed by physician associates/physician assistants (PAs) versus staff urologists (SUs).
METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of our earlier single-center, prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial that originally investigated irrigation "bag squeeze" versus standard cystoscopy. In this analysis, 98 men who underwent flexible cystoscopy by either a SU or a PA were included. Patients completed a pain questionnaire following the procedure.
RESULTS: The mean pain score for SU-performed cystoscopy was 2.67 compared with 2.62 for PA-performed cystoscopy ( p = .92). A total of 23 cystoscopies (SU-performed, 11 [23%]; PA-performed, 12 [24%]; p > .05) resulted in positive or suspicious findings. Pathologic sampling was performed for 15 (SU-performed, 6; PA-performed, 9), out of which 8 total (SU-performed, 3 [6.25%]; PA-performed 5 [10%]) were positive for urothelial cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: PA-performed cystoscopies demonstrate similar outcomes to those performed by physicians in terms of patient-reported pain scores and malignancy detection rates.
METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of our earlier single-center, prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial that originally investigated irrigation "bag squeeze" versus standard cystoscopy. In this analysis, 98 men who underwent flexible cystoscopy by either a SU or a PA were included. Patients completed a pain questionnaire following the procedure.
RESULTS: The mean pain score for SU-performed cystoscopy was 2.67 compared with 2.62 for PA-performed cystoscopy ( p = .92). A total of 23 cystoscopies (SU-performed, 11 [23%]; PA-performed, 12 [24%]; p > .05) resulted in positive or suspicious findings. Pathologic sampling was performed for 15 (SU-performed, 6; PA-performed, 9), out of which 8 total (SU-performed, 3 [6.25%]; PA-performed 5 [10%]) were positive for urothelial cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: PA-performed cystoscopies demonstrate similar outcomes to those performed by physicians in terms of patient-reported pain scores and malignancy detection rates.