Warren Snodgrass1, Ali Ziada, Selcuk Yucel, Amit Gupta. 1. Pediatric Urology Section, Department of Urology, Children's Medical Center and The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 1935 Motor Street, Dallas, TX 75207, USA. warren.snodgrass@childrens.com
Abstract
AIM: We administered a standardized questionnaire to parents and operating surgeon to determine their opinions regarding outcomes from tubularized incised plate (TIP) hypospadias repair. METHODS: Likert scale questionnaires were used to assess six outcomes: overall penile appearance, cosmesis of meatus and skin, penile size, straightness during erection, and voided stream. These were answered by consecutive parents of boys 6 weeks following TIP hypospadias repair, as well as by the surgeon. Controls were normal boys 6 weeks after elective circumcision, with their parents and the surgeon answering the same questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in responses between parents of boys undergoing TIP repair for distal (n=50) to proximal (n=15) hypospadias compared to parents of normal boys undergoing elective circumcision (n=22). Surgeon impressions of cosmetic results were slightly, but significantly, more favorable than those of parents. Surgeon scores were higher for distal versus proximal hypospadias outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides objective evidence that parents consider TIP hypospadias repair to create a normally functioning and appearing penis. Parent and surgeon opinions of cosmetic outcomes were similar, although surgeon impressions were more favorable.
AIM: We administered a standardized questionnaire to parents and operating surgeon to determine their opinions regarding outcomes from tubularized incised plate (TIP) hypospadias repair. METHODS: Likert scale questionnaires were used to assess six outcomes: overall penile appearance, cosmesis of meatus and skin, penile size, straightness during erection, and voided stream. These were answered by consecutive parents of boys 6 weeks following TIP hypospadias repair, as well as by the surgeon. Controls were normal boys 6 weeks after elective circumcision, with their parents and the surgeon answering the same questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in responses between parents of boys undergoing TIP repair for distal (n=50) to proximal (n=15) hypospadias compared to parents of normal boys undergoing elective circumcision (n=22). Surgeon impressions of cosmetic results were slightly, but significantly, more favorable than those of parents. Surgeon scores were higher for distal versus proximal hypospadias outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides objective evidence that parents consider TIP hypospadias repair to create a normally functioning and appearing penis. Parent and surgeon opinions of cosmetic outcomes were similar, although surgeon impressions were more favorable.