Literature DB >> 20705867

Foreskin management: Survey of Canadian pediatric urologists.

Peter D Metcalfe1, Remon Elyas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the approaches to foreskin management of pediatric urologists in Canada.
DESIGN: An online questionnaire comprising several survey questions and clinical vignettes.
SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: All members of the Pediatric Urologists of Canada. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnoses and management strategies for common foreskin conditions seen in consultation, including how many pediatric urologists perform neonatal circumcisions, patient costs, and the reasons for performing the surgery.
RESULTS: Of the 32 members surveyed, 24 (75%) responded. By far most respondents do not perform neonatal circumcisions; however, many perform circumcisions under general anesthesia for religious and cultural purposes. Typically, patient costs for circumcision range from $500 to $1000. Management of asymptomatic physiologic phimosis is very conservative, with surgeons unlikely to intervene. Neither the presence of ballooning of the foreskin during voiding nor the child's age affects physicians' tendency toward conservative management. Balanitis xerotica obliterans was the only scenario in which most respondents believed there was a need to intervene with either topical steroids or circumcision.
CONCLUSION: Our data support the hypothesis that pediatric urologists across Canada are very similar in their conservative approach to the management of common foreskin issues. Our goal is to improve the knowledge base among primary care providers and subsequently decrease patient and family anxieties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20705867      PMCID: PMC2920795     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  24 in total

1.  Towards evidence based circumcision of English boys: survey of trends in practice.

Authors:  A M Rickwood; S E Kenny; S C Donnell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-09-30

2.  The fate of the foreskin, a study of circumcision.

Authors:  D GAIRDNER
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1949-12-24

Review 3.  Routine neonatal circumcision: a reappraisal.

Authors:  T E Wiswell
Journal:  Am Fam Physician       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 3.292

4.  Circumcision no longer a "routine" surgical procedure.

Authors:  E LeBourdais
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1995-06-01       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 5.  Benefits and risks of circumcision.

Authors:  E Warner; E Strashin
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1981-11-01       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Phimosis--a diagnostic dilemma?

Authors:  Thomas B McGregor; John G Pike; Michael P Leonard
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.344

Review 7.  Pathologic and physiologic phimosis: approach to the phimotic foreskin.

Authors:  Thomas B McGregor; John G Pike; Michael P Leonard
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Severe complications of circumcision: an analysis of 48 cases.

Authors:  Kadir Ceylan; Köseoğlu Burhan; Yüksel Yilmaz; Saban Can; Alpaslan Kuş; Güneş Mustafa
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2006-06-09       Impact factor: 1.830

9.  Urethroplasty for balanitis xerotica obliterans.

Authors:  S N Venn; A R Mundy
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1998-05

10.  Ballooning of the foreskin and physiological phimosis: is there any objective evidence of obstructed voiding?

Authors:  Ramesh Babu; Sara K Harrison; Kim A R Hutton
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.588

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Prepuce health and childhood circumcision: Choices in Canada.

Authors:  Emmanuel O Abara
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Foreskin management.

Authors:  Laura B Clark
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Gairdner was wrong.

Authors:  George C Denniston; George Hill
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Teaching neonatal circumcision.

Authors:  Peter Metcalfe
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  [Nonretractable foreskin in boys without complaints : An indication for circumcision?]

Authors:  K Eckert; N Janssen; M Franz; P Liedgens
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Circumcision in children.

Authors:  Anup Mohta
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2011-05-28       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 7.  Catheterization without foreskin retraction.

Authors:  Adrienne Carmack; Marilyn Fayre Milos
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Canadian Urological Association guideline on the care of the normal foreskin and neonatal circumcision in Canadian infants (full version).

Authors:  Sumit Dave; Kourosh Afshar; Luis H Braga; Peter Anderson
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Could a careful clinical examination distinguish physiologic phimosis from balanitis xerotica obliterans in children?

Authors:  Filippo Ghidini; Calogero Virgone; Rebecca Pulvirenti; Emanuele Trovalusci; Piergiorgio Gamba
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 3.183

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.