PURPOSE: We assessed patient quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score, as evaluated with a novel visual analog scale questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 246 male patients with a chief complaint of lower urinary tract symptom were asked to complete the International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale questionnaires to assess bother or satisfaction regarding patient quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score. RESULTS: An item with the maximum visual analog scale measure matched the chief complaint in 169 patients (69%). In contrast, the chief complaint failed to match to an item with the most severe International Prostate Symptom Score in 104 patients (42%) (p = 0.012). Multiple regression analysis to define the best predictor of International Prostate Symptom Score quality of life score of the 14 items, including International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale, revealed that the best predictor was the visual analog scale measure for nocturia (p = 0.0003), followed by visual analog scale measures for frequency (p = 0.0004) and incomplete emptying (p = 0.01). After alpha-blocker treatment improvement in the visual analog scale measure for the chief complaint correlated better with improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score quality of life score than the change in International Prostate Symptom Score. The overall test-retest correlation for the visual analog scale questionnaire in 55 healthy elderly men and 44 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms was 0.772 and 0.742, respectively (p <0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: The novel visual analog scale measure of quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score has a significant impact on identifying the patient chief complaint as well as on patient specific quality of life. Our study supports the concomitant use of the International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale questionnaires.
PURPOSE: We assessed patient quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score, as evaluated with a novel visual analog scale questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 246 male patients with a chief complaint of lower urinary tract symptom were asked to complete the International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale questionnaires to assess bother or satisfaction regarding patient quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score. RESULTS: An item with the maximum visual analog scale measure matched the chief complaint in 169 patients (69%). In contrast, the chief complaint failed to match to an item with the most severe International Prostate Symptom Score in 104 patients (42%) (p = 0.012). Multiple regression analysis to define the best predictor of International Prostate Symptom Score quality of life score of the 14 items, including International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale, revealed that the best predictor was the visual analog scale measure for nocturia (p = 0.0003), followed by visual analog scale measures for frequency (p = 0.0004) and incomplete emptying (p = 0.01). After alpha-blocker treatment improvement in the visual analog scale measure for the chief complaint correlated better with improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score quality of life score than the change in International Prostate Symptom Score. The overall test-retest correlation for the visual analog scale questionnaire in 55 healthy elderly men and 44 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms was 0.772 and 0.742, respectively (p <0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: The novel visual analog scale measure of quality of life specific to each of the 7 items on the International Prostate Symptom Score has a significant impact on identifying the patient chief complaint as well as on patient specific quality of life. Our study supports the concomitant use of the International Prostate Symptom Score and visual analog scale questionnaires.
Authors: Peter Weibl; Tobias Klatte; Peter Laurinc; Roman Tomaškin; Shahrokh F Shariat; Miroslav Helbich; Danica Fackovcova; Peter Bujdák Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Rachel E Selekman; Catherine R Harris; Pauline Filippou; Thomas Chi; Amjad Alwaal; Sarah D Blaschko; Benjamin N Breyer Journal: Urology Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Eduardo de Paula Miranda; Cristiano Mendes Gomes; Fábio César Miranda Torricelli; José de Bessa; José Everton de Castro; Bruno Roberto da Silva Ferreira; Ariel Gustavo Scafuri; Homero Bruschini; Miguel Srougi Journal: Int Neurourol J Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: Hyun Ik Jang; Sung Gon Park; Kang Hee Shim; Jong Bo Choi; Jung Hwan Lee; Dae Sung Cho Journal: Int Neurourol J Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 2.835