Eric M Ghiraldi1, Madhumitha Reddy1, Tianyu Li2, Andrew C Lawler3, Justin I Friedlander1,4. 1. 1 Department of Urology, Einstein Healthcare Network , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. 2 Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Facility, Fox Chase Cancer Center , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. 3 Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. 4 Division of Urologic Oncology and Urology, Fox Chase Cancer Center , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients living in underserved areas do regularly express an interest in stone prevention; however, factors limiting participation, aside from obvious cost considerations, are largely unknown. To better understand factors associated with compliance with submitting 24-hour urine collections, we reviewed our patient experience at the kidney stone clinic at a hospital that provides care for an underserved urban community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients treated for kidney and/or ureteral stones between August 2014 and May 2016 was performed. Patient demographics, medical characteristics, stone factors, and compliance data were compiled into our data set. Patients were divided into two groups: those who did and did not submit the requested initial 24-hour urine collection. Analysis of factors related to compliance was performed using univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients met inclusion criteria for our study, 42.5% (82/193) of whom submitted 24-hour urine samples. Of the 82 collections submitted, 34.1% (28/82) were considered inadequate by creatinine level. A second urine collection within 6 months was obtained in 14.0% (27/193) of patients. Univariate analysis demonstrated that African American (AA) patients were less likely to submit an initial 24-hour urine collection than Caucasian patients (collected: 30.9% vs 51.8%; p < 0.05, respectively). Patients with a family history of kidney stones were more likely to submit an initial 24-hour urine collection than patients without a family history of kidney stones (61.1% vs 38.2%, p < 0.02, respectively). On multivariate analysis, both factors remained significant predictors of compliance with submitting a 24-hour urine collection. CONCLUSIONS: In our underserved patient population, AA patients were half as likely to submit a 24-hour urine collection than Caucasian patients, whereas patients with a positive family history of stones were more than twice as likely to submit than patients with no family history.
PURPOSE:Patients living in underserved areas do regularly express an interest in stone prevention; however, factors limiting participation, aside from obvious cost considerations, are largely unknown. To better understand factors associated with compliance with submitting 24-hour urine collections, we reviewed our patient experience at the kidney stone clinic at a hospital that provides care for an underserved urban community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients treated for kidney and/or ureteral stones between August 2014 and May 2016 was performed. Patient demographics, medical characteristics, stone factors, and compliance data were compiled into our data set. Patients were divided into two groups: those who did and did not submit the requested initial 24-hour urine collection. Analysis of factors related to compliance was performed using univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients met inclusion criteria for our study, 42.5% (82/193) of whom submitted 24-hour urine samples. Of the 82 collections submitted, 34.1% (28/82) were considered inadequate by creatinine level. A second urine collection within 6 months was obtained in 14.0% (27/193) of patients. Univariate analysis demonstrated that African American (AA) patients were less likely to submit an initial 24-hour urine collection than Caucasian patients (collected: 30.9% vs 51.8%; p < 0.05, respectively). Patients with a family history of kidney stones were more likely to submit an initial 24-hour urine collection than patients without a family history of kidney stones (61.1% vs 38.2%, p < 0.02, respectively). On multivariate analysis, both factors remained significant predictors of compliance with submitting a 24-hour urine collection. CONCLUSIONS: In our underserved patient population, AA patients were half as likely to submit a 24-hour urine collection than Caucasian patients, whereas patients with a positive family history of stones were more than twice as likely to submit than patients with no family history.
Entities:
Keywords:
compliance; metabolic evaluation; nephrolithiasis; underserved population
Authors: Carter Boyd; Kyle Wood; Dustin Whitaker; Omotola Ashorobi; Lisa Harvey; Robert Oster; Ross P Holmes; Dean G Assimos Journal: Rev Urol Date: 2018
Authors: Calyani Ganesan; I-Chun Thomas; Shen Song; Andrew J Sun; Ericka M Sohlberg; Manjula Kurella Tamura; Glenn M Chertow; Joseph C Liao; Simon Conti; Christopher S Elliott; John T Leppert; Alan C Pao Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hui Li; Eugene Shkolyar; Jing Wang; Simon Conti; Alan C Pao; Joseph C Liao; Tak-Sing Wong; Pak Kin Wong Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 14.136
Authors: Anna L Zisman; Fredric L Coe; Andrew J Cohen; Christopher B Riedinger; Elaine M Worcester Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 8.237