Barriers to accessing urethroplasty.

Reviews in urology Pub Date : 2016-01-01 DOI:10.3909/riu0731
Michael J Consolo, Kirin K. Syed, Christopher M Robison, Jacob D McFadden, D. Shalowitz, G. Brown, D. Sussman, Bradley D. Figler
{"title":"Barriers to accessing urethroplasty.","authors":"Michael J Consolo, Kirin K. Syed, Christopher M Robison, Jacob D McFadden, D. Shalowitz, G. Brown, D. Sussman, Bradley D. Figler","doi":"10.3909/riu0731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urethroplasty is an effective treatment for men with anterior urethral strictures, but is utilized less frequently than ineffective treatments such as internal urethrotomy. We sought to identify provider-level barriers to urethroplasty. An anonymous online survey was emailed to all Mid-Atlantic American Urological Association members. Six scenarios in which urethroplasty was the most appropriate treatment were presented. Primary outcome was recommendation for urethroplasty in ≥ three clinical scenarios. Other factors measured include practice zip code, urethroplasty training, and proximity to a urethroplasty surgeon. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with increased likelihood of urethroplasty recommendation. Of 670 members emailed, 109 (16%) completed the survey. Final analysis included 88 respondents. Mean years in practice was 17.2. Most respondents received formal training in urethroplasty: 43 (49%) in residency, 5 (6%) in fellowship, and 10 (11%) in both; 48 respondents (55%) had a urethroplasty surgeon in their practice, whereas 18 (20%) had a urethroplasty surgeon within 45 minutes of his or her primary practice location. The only covariate that was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending urethroplasty in ≥ three scenarios was formal urethroplasty training. Most members (68%) reported no barriers to referring patients for urethroplasty; the most common barriers cited were long distance to urethroplasty surgeon (n 5 13, 15%) and concern about complications (n 5 8, 9%). Urethroplasty continues to be underutilized in men with anterior urethral strictures, potentially due to lack of knowledge dissemination and access to a urethroplasty surgeon. Appropriate urethroplasty utilization may increase with greater exposure to urethroplasty in training.","PeriodicalId":94353,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in urology","volume":"43 5","pages":"188-193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3909/riu0731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Urethroplasty is an effective treatment for men with anterior urethral strictures, but is utilized less frequently than ineffective treatments such as internal urethrotomy. We sought to identify provider-level barriers to urethroplasty. An anonymous online survey was emailed to all Mid-Atlantic American Urological Association members. Six scenarios in which urethroplasty was the most appropriate treatment were presented. Primary outcome was recommendation for urethroplasty in ≥ three clinical scenarios. Other factors measured include practice zip code, urethroplasty training, and proximity to a urethroplasty surgeon. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with increased likelihood of urethroplasty recommendation. Of 670 members emailed, 109 (16%) completed the survey. Final analysis included 88 respondents. Mean years in practice was 17.2. Most respondents received formal training in urethroplasty: 43 (49%) in residency, 5 (6%) in fellowship, and 10 (11%) in both; 48 respondents (55%) had a urethroplasty surgeon in their practice, whereas 18 (20%) had a urethroplasty surgeon within 45 minutes of his or her primary practice location. The only covariate that was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending urethroplasty in ≥ three scenarios was formal urethroplasty training. Most members (68%) reported no barriers to referring patients for urethroplasty; the most common barriers cited were long distance to urethroplasty surgeon (n 5 13, 15%) and concern about complications (n 5 8, 9%). Urethroplasty continues to be underutilized in men with anterior urethral strictures, potentially due to lack of knowledge dissemination and access to a urethroplasty surgeon. Appropriate urethroplasty utilization may increase with greater exposure to urethroplasty in training.
获得尿道成形术的障碍。
尿道成形术是治疗男性前尿道狭窄的有效方法,但与无效的治疗方法如内尿道切开术相比,使用频率较低。我们试图确定医生对尿道成形术的障碍。一份匿名的在线调查通过电子邮件发送给了中大西洋美国泌尿外科协会的所有成员。在六种情况下,尿道成形术是最合适的治疗提出。主要结局是在≥3种临床情况下推荐行尿道成形术。其他测量的因素包括实践邮政编码,尿道成形术训练,和接近尿道成形术医生。多因素logistic回归确定了与推荐尿道成形术可能性增加相关的因素。通过电子邮件发送的670名会员中,有109人(16%)完成了调查。最终分析包括88名受访者。平均实习年数为17.2年。大多数应答者接受过尿道成形术的正式培训:住院医师43人(49%),研究员5人(6%),两者均有10人(11%);48名受访者(55%)在他们的诊所有过尿道成形术医生,而18名(20%)在他或她的主要诊所45分钟内有过尿道成形术医生。在≥3种情况下,与推荐尿道成形术可能性增加相关的唯一协变量是正式的尿道成形术训练。大多数成员(68%)报告转诊患者行尿道成形术没有障碍;最常见的障碍是距离尿道成形术医生太远(513.15%)和对并发症的担忧(58.9%)。尿道成形术在前尿道狭窄的男性中仍未得到充分利用,这可能是由于缺乏知识传播和获得尿道成形术医生的机会。适当的尿道成形术的使用可能随着训练中尿道成形术的增加而增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信