Literature DB >> 33471043

Evaluation of Patient- and Surgeon-Specific Variations in Patient-Reported Urinary Outcomes 3 Months After Radical Prostatectomy From a Statewide Improvement Collaborative.

Gregory B Auffenberg1, Ji Qi2, Rodney L Dunn2, Susan Linsell2, Tae Kim3, David C Miller2, Jeffrey Tosoian2, Richard Sarle4, William K Johnston5, Eduardo Kleer6, Khurshid R Ghani2, James Montie2, James Peabody7.   

Abstract

Importance: Understanding variation in patient-reported outcomes following radical prostatectomy may inform efforts to reduce morbidity after this procedure. Objective: To describe patient-reported urinary outcomes following radical prostatectomy in the diverse practice settings of a statewide quality improvement program and to explore whether surgeon-specific variations in observed outcomes persist after accounting for patient-level factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective population-based cohort study included 4582 men in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative who underwent radical prostatectomy as primary management of localized prostate cancer between April 2014 and July 2018 and who agreed to complete validated questionnaires prior to surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Data were analyzed from 2019 to June 2019. Exposures: Radical prostatectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient- and surgeon-level analyses of patient-reported urinary function 3 months after radical prostatectomy. Outcomes were measured using validated questionnaires with results standardized using previously published methods. Urinary function survey scores are reported on a scale from 0 to 100 with good function established as a score of 74 or higher.
Results: For the 4582 men undergoing radical prostatectomy within the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative who agreed to complete surveys, mean (SD) age was 63.3 (7.1) years. Survey response rates varied: 3791 of 4582 (83%) responded at baseline, 3282 of 4137 (79%) at 3 months, 2975 of 3770 (79%) at 6 months, and 2213 of 2882 (77%) at 12 months. Mean (SD) urinary function scores were 88.5 (14.3) at baseline, 53.6 (27.5) at 3 months, 68.0 (25.1) at 6 months, and 73.7 (23.0) at 12 months. Regression analysis demonstrated that older age, lower baseline urinary function score, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 30 or higher, clinical stage T2 or higher, and lack of bilateral nerve-sparing surgery were associated with a lower probability of reporting good urinary function 3 months after surgery. When evaluating patients with good baseline function, the rate at which individual surgeons' patients reported good urinary function 3 months after surgery varied broadly (0% to 54.5%; P < .001). Patients receiving surgery from top-performing surgeons were more likely to report good 3-month function. This finding persisted after accounting for patient risk factors. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patient- and surgeon-level urinary outcomes following prostatectomy varied substantially. Documenting surgeon-specific variations after accounting for patient factors may facilitate identification of surgical factors associated with superior outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33471043      PMCID: PMC7948058          DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.6359

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   14.766


  25 in total

1.  Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Paul R Womble; James E Montie; Zaojun Ye; Susan M Linsell; Brian R Lane; David C Miller
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Treating older men with prostate cancer: survival (or selection) of the fittest?

Authors:  Mark S Litwin; David C Miller
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-12-13       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Jonathan F Finks; Amanda O'Reilly; Mary Oerline; Arthur M Carlin; Andre R Nunn; Justin Dimick; Mousumi Banerjee; Nancy J O Birkmeyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Measuring to Improve: Peer and Crowd-sourced Assessments of Technical Skill with Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Khurshid R Ghani; David C Miller; Susan Linsell; Andrew Brachulis; Brian Lane; Richard Sarle; Deepansh Dalela; Mani Menon; Bryan Comstock; Thomas S Lendvay; James Montie; James O Peabody
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2016-01-02       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Karen M Jones; Michael J Barry; William J Aronson; Steven Fox; Jeffrey R Gingrich; John T Wei; Patricia Gilhooly; B Mayer Grob; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Roohollah Sharifi; William Blank; Parikshit Pandya; Gerald L Andriole; Daniel Culkin; Thomas Wheeler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Unexpected Long-term Improvements in Urinary and Erectile Function in a Large Cohort of Men with Self-reported Outcomes Following Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Justin K Lee; Melissa Assel; Alan E Thong; Daniel D Sjoberg; John P Mulhall; Jaspreet Sandhu; Andrew J Vickers; Behfar Ehdaie
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  States Worse Than Death Among Hospitalized Patients With Serious Illnesses.

Authors:  Emily B Rubin; Anna E Buehler; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  Racial Variation in Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer: Results from the CEASAR Study.

Authors:  Mark D Tyson; JoAnn Alvarez; Tatsuki Koyama; Karen E Hoffman; Matthew J Resnick; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Matthew R Cooperberg; Michael Goodman; Sheldon Greenfield; Ann S Hamilton; Mia Hashibe; Lisa E Paddock; Antoinette Stroup; Vivien W Chen; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors.

Authors:  Martin G Sanda; Rodney L Dunn; Jeff Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Laurel Northouse; Larry Hembroff; Xihong Lin; Thomas K Greenfield; Mark S Litwin; Christopher S Saigal; Arul Mahadevan; Eric Klein; Adam Kibel; Louis L Pisters; Deborah Kuban; Irving Kaplan; David Wood; Jay Ciezki; Nikhil Shah; John T Wei
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-03-20       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Matthew J Resnick; Tatsuki Koyama; Kang-Hsien Fan; Peter C Albertsen; Michael Goodman; Ann S Hamilton; Richard M Hoffman; Arnold L Potosky; Janet L Stanford; Antoinette M Stroup; R Lawrence Van Horn; David F Penson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-01-31       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  2 in total

1.  Assessing the Impact of Decision Aid Use on Post Prostatectomy Patient Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  Giulia I Lane; Ji Qi; Ajith Dupati; Stephanie Ferrante; Rodney L Dunn; Roshan Paudel; Daniela Wittmann; Lauren P Wallner; Donna L Berry; Chad Ellimoottil; James E Montie; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 2.633

Review 2.  Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures into health care for men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Udit Singhal; Ted A Skolarus; John L Gore; Matthew G Parry; Ronald C Chen; Julie Nossiter; Alan Paniagua-Cruz; Arvin K George; Paul Cathcart; Jan van der Meulen; Daniela A Wittmann
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 16.430

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.