Ayush Lohiya1, Shashi Kant1, Arti Kapil2, Sanjeev Kumar Gupta1, Puneet Misra1, Sanjay K Rai1. 1. Centre for Community Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029, India. 2. Department of Microbiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stones in the urinary tract are a common condition but there is paucity of data on their population-based estimates in India. We describe our findings of the burden of urinary stones during a cross-sectional study with another primary goal. METHODS: We conducted the study at Ballabgarh Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Haryana, among residents aged 18 years or above. We used simple random sampling to enrol participants. Self-reported history of urinary stones was elicited through an interview schedule. Results of the descriptive analysis were described as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) or as mean wherever applicable. Bivariate analysis was done using t-test and chi-square test as applicable. RESULTS: The response rate for our study was 86.6%; lifetime prevalence (95% CI) of urinary stones was 7.9% (5.7, 10.8). In a majority of participants, urinary stones were diagnosed at an age of 20-40 years (55.9%), mostly by an ultrasonography examination (94.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A high burden of urinary stones is indicated in the working-age population in northern India at the community level. Untreated urinary stones can lead to an acute emergency (colic) or may have long-term adverse consequences, e.g. hydronephrosis, which have implications for the healthcare delivery system.
BACKGROUND: Stones in the urinary tract are a common condition but there is paucity of data on their population-based estimates in India. We describe our findings of the burden of urinary stones during a cross-sectional study with another primary goal. METHODS: We conducted the study at Ballabgarh Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Haryana, among residents aged 18 years or above. We used simple random sampling to enrol participants. Self-reported history of urinary stones was elicited through an interview schedule. Results of the descriptive analysis were described as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) or as mean wherever applicable. Bivariate analysis was done using t-test and chi-square test as applicable. RESULTS: The response rate for our study was 86.6%; lifetime prevalence (95% CI) of urinary stones was 7.9% (5.7, 10.8). In a majority of participants, urinary stones were diagnosed at an age of 20-40 years (55.9%), mostly by an ultrasonography examination (94.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A high burden of urinary stones is indicated in the working-age population in northern India at the community level. Untreated urinary stones can lead to an acute emergency (colic) or may have long-term adverse consequences, e.g. hydronephrosis, which have implications for the healthcare delivery system.