Adherence to guidelines in the management of urolithiasis: are there differences among distinct patient care settings?

Abstract

Urolithiasis is a common diagnosis in urology. New technologies offer a variety of diagnostic and therapy and consequently display a financial burden on healthcare systems. Hence, clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are essential to implement evidence-based medicine and assure a standard of care considering limited resources. To date, there is no evidence of the use and adherence to CPG on urolithiasis. Therefore, we performed a cross-sectional study to analyze the use of CPG on urolithiasis. Data collection was carried out by a questionnaire given to 400 German urologists. The survey included use and adherence to guidelines, evaluation of the clinical situation, therapy spectrum, and workplace. In total, 150 (37%) questionnaires were received and included in our survey. Statistics were performed by SPSS using Chi-quadrat test/Fisher's exact test. In our study, urologists were office based, hospital affiliated, non-academic, or academic centers in 53%, 32%, 16% and 5%, respectively. In 74% and 70%, urologists adhere to CPG in diagnostic and therapy. Interestingly, workplace and therapy spectrum determines the use of different CPG (p = 0.01; p = 0.022). Academic urologists were more likely to use international CPG of EAU (40%), while outpatient urologists significantly orientated on national CPG (46%). 86% of urologists with high volume of urolithiasis practice interventions in contrast to 53% in low volume (p = 0.001). More than 80% of urologists use short versions and app version of CPG. We firstly describe compliance and the use of CPG on urolithiasis. EAU and DGU present the most commonly used CPG. Short version and app version of CPG find frequent clinical utilization.