Neurourology and urodynamics · 2019
How cure rates drive patients' preference for urethral bulking agent or mid-urethral sling surgery as therapy for stress urinary incontinence.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Casteleijn Fenne M, Enklaar Rosa A, El Bouyahyaoui Ikram, Jeffery Stephen, Zwolsman Sandra E, Roovers Jan-Paul W R
Аннотация
AIMS: To assess the patients' median-accepted threshold of cure rate for urethral bulking agent (UBA) treatment compared to mid-urethral sling (MUS) surgery for treatment of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Secondly, to determine the correlation between treatment trade-off point and patient characteristics.
METHODS: Women older than 18 years, with predominant SUI, seeking treatment, underwent a structured interview. The treatment trade-off point was determined in scenario one: UBA vs transobturator standard MUS surgery (SMUS) performed under general/spinal anesthesia with one-night hospital stay, and scenario 2: UBA compared to single-incision MUS surgery (SIMS) performed under local analgesia (with sedation) in a daycare setting. The treatment trade-off point was assessed by decreasing the cure rate of UBA from 85% to 10% with steps of 2% until the patient's treatment preference switched to SMUS/SIMS.
RESULTS: One hundred and five patients were interviewed. Mean age was 52 years (SD, ±13.4). The median trade-off point for scenarios 1 and 2 was 79% (interquartile range [IQR]: 69, 85) and 85% (IQR: 71, 85), respectively. Patients with longer duration of SUI symptoms were willing to trade more efficacy to prefer UBA treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SUI are willing to trade a lower cure rate to prefer UBA over SMUS to avoid hospitalization and general anesthesia. When SIMS is performed in a daycare setting under local analgesia, the majority of patients with SUI are of the opinion that cure rates of UBA should be at least as high as SIMS to be worth considering. The treatment preference is not strongly correlated with the patients' characteristics.
METHODS: Women older than 18 years, with predominant SUI, seeking treatment, underwent a structured interview. The treatment trade-off point was determined in scenario one: UBA vs transobturator standard MUS surgery (SMUS) performed under general/spinal anesthesia with one-night hospital stay, and scenario 2: UBA compared to single-incision MUS surgery (SIMS) performed under local analgesia (with sedation) in a daycare setting. The treatment trade-off point was assessed by decreasing the cure rate of UBA from 85% to 10% with steps of 2% until the patient's treatment preference switched to SMUS/SIMS.
RESULTS: One hundred and five patients were interviewed. Mean age was 52 years (SD, ±13.4). The median trade-off point for scenarios 1 and 2 was 79% (interquartile range [IQR]: 69, 85) and 85% (IQR: 71, 85), respectively. Patients with longer duration of SUI symptoms were willing to trade more efficacy to prefer UBA treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SUI are willing to trade a lower cure rate to prefer UBA over SMUS to avoid hospitalization and general anesthesia. When SIMS is performed in a daycare setting under local analgesia, the majority of patients with SUI are of the opinion that cure rates of UBA should be at least as high as SIMS to be worth considering. The treatment preference is not strongly correlated with the patients' characteristics.