MP01-02 UNDERSTANDING HOLEP RECOVERY: ASSESSING PATIENT EXPECTATIONS & UNDERSTANDING

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Surgical Therapy & New Technology I (MP01)1 Sep 2021MP01-02 UNDERSTANDING HOLEP RECOVERY: ASSESSING PATIENT EXPECTATIONS & UNDERSTANDING Mark Assmus, Matthew Lee, Deepak Agarwal, Tim Large, and Amy Krambeck Mark AssmusMark Assmus More articles by this author , Matthew LeeMatthew Lee More articles by this author , Deepak AgarwalDeepak Agarwal More articles by this author , Tim LargeTim Large More articles by this author , and Amy KrambeckAmy Krambeck More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001962.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Although holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a highly effective surgery for BPH; there is a variable period of recovery where patients may experience hematuria, dysuria or urinary incontinence (UI). Despite preoperative consultation, there is a paucity of literature examining physician-patient communication of the postoperative recovery from the patients’ perspective. We sought to examine patient expectation and understanding as a patient reported outcome (PRO) quality metric for HoLEP. METHODS: With IRB approval we queried our EMR and retrospective clinical registry to identify 50 consecutive patients that underwent HoLEP Nov 2019 – Mar 2020 by two endourologists at our center. Patients were provided a PRO questionnaire via Twistle ≥6 months postoperatively. Patient demographics and perioperative course was examined in the context of their responses. Our primary objectives were to assess whether patients felt they had a reasonable understanding of the recovery period and identify areas requiring improvement. RESULTS: We observed a 92% (46/50) response rate with average age 72.2 years (range 41.6-88.5). Overall, 91.3% (42/46) felt they had a reasonable understanding of the healing process. 97.8% (45/56) were aware there may be temporary UI with 87% having ≥1 episodes of UI after catheter removal. 47.8% (22/46) of patients expected their UI to resolve within 30 days while 8.6% expected >90 days of UI. Patients unaware of the risk of UI reported the degree of not knowing to be 1/10 on a 10-point Likert scale (1=no bother). All patients were aware of the risk of hematuria with 93.5% (43/46) expecting resolution within 30 days (<7 d 47.8%, 7-14 d 28.3%, 15-30 d 17.4%). Despite preoperative counseling, 10.9% (5/46) were not aware ejaculate volume may change postoperatively with 80% of these patients reporting that is important information. After catheter removal 69.6% experienced any dysuria, with 65.6% reporting - ″as expected″, 28.1% - ″Less painful″, 3.1% - ″More painful.″ The three most common patient reported ways to improve communication were: 27.3% - handout, 18.2% - spend more time, 18.2% - explain to family member/friend. Only 9.1% felt communication could improve with a HoLEP website. CONCLUSIONS: Although surgical technique and technologies continue to improve the outcomes and postoperative recovery following HoLEP, ensuring adequate physician-patient communication to optimize expectations is also crucial. We report patient understanding of HoLEP recovery and areas for future improvement. Source of Funding: None to disclose © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e1-e1 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Mark Assmus More articles by this author Matthew Lee More articles by this author Deepak Agarwal More articles by this author Tim Large More articles by this author Amy Krambeck More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...