Pooja Balchandra1, Lynne Rogerson. 1. Department of Urogynaecology, St James's University Hospital, Level 1, Chancellor Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS97TF, UK, poojabalchandra@gmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Comprehension of women's perspective and reasons for their choice between intra-detrusor botox (botox) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM) after failed anticholinergic treatment for overactive bladder syndrome (OAB) have not been evaluated and reported in the literature. Our voluntary service evaluation survey aimed to determine reasons behind individual patient choice. METHODS: All women were counseled in detail regarding the two treatment options available after failed anticholinergic treatment as per the hospital trust policy. Once the decision-making process was completed, they were asked to highlight one or more of the 12 questions within the survey that influenced their decision-making process. RESULTS: Fifty patients, with a mean age of 61.66 years (range 38-82 years) participated in our voluntary survey. Seventy-four per cent chose Botox and 26% chose SNM. In the botox group 54.05% disliked the thought of a foreign body in the back with SNM; 45.94% quoted shorter waiting times and 43.24% said that the quicker onset of benefit (within 3-5 days) with botox compared with SNM (up to 2 weeks) helped to influence their decision towards botox. In the SNM group 61.53% were averse to the potential need for botox to be repeated at variable intervals; 46.15% chose SNM to avoid the risk of urinary retention associated with botox. CONCLUSION: The botox group seemed more likely to need quicker results with easy access to the treatment modality, whilst the SNM group seemed keener to focus on a more permanent option with a known interval for the repeat procedure. The difference in patient choice was found to be statistically significant.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Comprehension of women's perspective and reasons for their choice between intra-detrusor botox (botox) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM) after failed anticholinergic treatment for overactive bladder syndrome (OAB) have not been evaluated and reported in the literature. Our voluntary service evaluation survey aimed to determine reasons behind individual patient choice. METHODS: All women were counseled in detail regarding the two treatment options available after failed anticholinergic treatment as per the hospital trust policy. Once the decision-making process was completed, they were asked to highlight one or more of the 12 questions within the survey that influenced their decision-making process. RESULTS: Fifty patients, with a mean age of 61.66 years (range 38-82 years) participated in our voluntary survey. Seventy-four per cent chose Botox and 26% chose SNM. In the botox group 54.05% disliked the thought of a foreign body in the back with SNM; 45.94% quoted shorter waiting times and 43.24% said that the quicker onset of benefit (within 3-5 days) with botox compared with SNM (up to 2 weeks) helped to influence their decision towards botox. In the SNM group 61.53% were averse to the potential need for botox to be repeated at variable intervals; 46.15% chose SNM to avoid the risk of urinary retention associated with botox. CONCLUSION: The botox group seemed more likely to need quicker results with easy access to the treatment modality, whilst the SNM group seemed keener to focus on a more permanent option with a known interval for the repeat procedure. The difference in patient choice was found to be statistically significant.
Authors: Salvador Arlandis; David Castro; Carlos Errando; Eldiberto Fernández; Miguel Jiménez; Paloma González; Carlos Crespo; Funke Staeuble; José Manuel Rodríguez; Max Brosa Journal: Value Health Date: 2011 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Roger Dmochowski; Christopher Chapple; Victor W Nitti; Michael Chancellor; Karel Everaert; Catherine Thompson; Grace Daniell; Jihao Zhou; Cornelia Haag-Molkenteller Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-10-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: P Abrams; J G Blaivas; C J Fowler; J L Fourcroy; S A Macdiarmid; S W Siegel; P Van Kerrebroeck Journal: BJU Int Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Anne P Cameron; Jennifer T Anger; Rodger Madison; Christopher S Saigal; J Quentin Clemens Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2012-07-27 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Hashim Hashim; Kathleen Beusterien; John F P Bridges; Kaitlan Amos; Linda Cardozo Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Pawel Miotla; Rufus Cartwright; Katarzyna Skorupska; Michal Bogusiewicz; Ewa Markut-Miotla; Konrad Futyma; Tomasz Rechberger Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-11-26 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Le Mai Tu; Stefan De Wachter; Magali Robert; Roger R Dmochowski; Larry E Miller; Karel Everaert Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Shannon Hk Kim; David Habashy; Sana Pathan; Vincent Tse; Ruth Collins; Lewis Chan Journal: Int Neurourol J Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: Jacek K Szymański; Aneta Słabuszewska-Jóźwiak; Kornelia Zaręba; Grzegorz Jakiel Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 1.195