Literature DB >> 16456694

Is prevention of stone recurrence financially worthwhile?

W G Robertson1.   

Abstract

This review shows that the cost of relying solely on minimally-invasive urological procedures for removing stones when patients return with recurrent stones is considerable and is significantly greater that that incurred by screening already proven recurrent stone-formers to identify the risk factors that are causing their stones and then instituting prophylactic measures to prevent stone recurrence. In the UK, at 1998 prices (when the original survey was carried out) for every stone episode prevented, there is a potential saving of almost 2,000 pound to the local Health Authority concerned. In spite of this, many Health Authorities have taken the liberty to discontinue comprehensive stone screening within the past 20 years under the mistaken supposition that minimally-invasive techniques for removing stones have "solved the stone problem". At UCLH in London where such a comprehensive scheme has been in place for the past 8 years, savings of up to 250,000 pound per year can be made by identifying the particular lifestyle as well as the epidemiological, metabolic and nutritional risk factors involved in a given patient and then instituting appropriate measures to prevent further stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16456694     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-005-0030-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Res        ISSN: 0300-5623


  10 in total

1.  [Socioeconomic aspects of urinary calculi and metaphylaxis of urinary calculi].

Authors:  W L Strohmaier
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  LONG-TERM SURVEY OF 538 PATIENTS WITH UPPER URINARY TRACT STONE.

Authors:  R E WILLIAMS
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1963-12

Review 3.  The pathogenesis and treatment of kidney stones.

Authors:  F L Coe; J H Parks; J R Asplin
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1992-10-15       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Urologic diseases in America project: urolithiasis.

Authors:  Margaret S Pearle; Elizabeth A Calhoun; Gary C Curhan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 5.  Kidney stones.

Authors:  C Y Pak
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-06-13       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  The financial effects of kidney stone prevention.

Authors:  J H Parks; F L Coe
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 10.612

7.  Effect of medical management and residual fragments on recurrent stone formation following shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  J K Fine; C Y Pak; G M Preminger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  When should patients with symptomatic urinary stone disease be evaluated metabolically?

Authors:  R W Norman; S S Bath; W G Robertson; M Peacock
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  When is medical prophylaxis cost-effective for recurrent calcium stones?

Authors:  Paramjit S Chandhoke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  A risk factor model of stone-formation.

Authors:  William G Robertson
Journal:  Front Biosci       Date:  2003-09-01
  10 in total
  12 in total

Review 1.  Aspects on how extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be carried out in order to be maximally effective.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-06-27

Review 2.  Metabolic risk-evaluation and prevention of recurrence in stone disease: does it make sense?

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Medication-based urolithiasis and atazanavir.

Authors:  Paul M Koblic; Wayne L Gold; Charles J L la Porte; Todd C Lee
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  New potential solutions for the chemolysis of urinary phosphate calculi determined by an in vitro study.

Authors:  Jinqing Zhang; Shuo Wang; Jingfan Hong; Chunxiao Liu; Yanbin Jiang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 3.436

5.  Stones: Guidelines reignite interest in medical treatment of stones.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  Approach to the Adult Kidney Stone Former.

Authors:  Naim Maalouf
Journal:  Clin Rev Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2012-03

Review 7.  Should we modify the principles of risk evaluation and recurrence preventive treatment of patients with calcium oxalate stone disease in view of the etiologic importance of calcium phosphate?

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-08-03       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Changes in urinary risk profile after short-term low sodium and low calcium diet in recurrent Swiss kidney stone formers.

Authors:  Harald Seeger; Andrea Kaelin; Pietro M Ferraro; Damian Weber; Philippe Jaeger; Patrice Ambuehl; William G Robertson; Robert Unwin; Carsten A Wagner; Nilufar Mohebbi
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 2.388

Review 9.  Economic impact of urinary stones.

Authors:  Elias S Hyams; Brian R Matlaga
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2014-09

Review 10.  The preventive treatment of recurrent stone-formation: how can we improve compliance in the treatment of patients with recurrent stone disease?

Authors:  Dirk Jan Kok
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.