Literature DB >> 36238352

Assessing Quality and Safety of an Advanced Practice Provider-led Active Surveillance Clinic for Men with Prostate Cancer.

Matthew B Clements1, Xin Lin2, Caroline Gmelich1, Emily A Vertosick3, Andrew J Vickers3, Michael K Manasia1, Natalie C Wolchasty2, Peter T Scardino1, James A Eastham1, Vincent P Laudone1, Karim A Touijer1, Behfar Ehdaie1.   

Abstract

Purpose: We implemented an advanced practice provider (APP)-led clinic to aid in managing the growing population of men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the quality and safety of an established APP-led AS clinic by comparing outcomes with urologist-led biopsies, defined in terms of adherence to scheduled visits and biopsy complications. Materials and
Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 2341 consecutive patients treated in an AS clinic at a high-volume referral center between 2000-2019. We examined the rate of no-show or same-day cancellation of visits for APPs versus urologists and compared the risk of biopsy complications between these providers. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for repeated visits and biopsies.
Results: There were significantly more no-shows at APP visits (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.70, p <0.001); however, this only amounted to one no-show every 41 visits. There was no evidence of increased biopsy complications with APPs (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.05-2.49, p =0.3). Patients were not prospectively assigned to APP or urologist management; therefore, unmeasured patient differences could bias our results. Conclusions: We demonstrated that in an established APP-led AS clinic at a high-volume center, APPs achieved acceptable patient adherence to scheduled visits and biopsy complications. Because patients were not continuously managed by one type of provider, further prospective studies are needed to establish equivalent pathologic outcomes in APP-managed AS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active surveillance; Advanced Practice Providers; Nurse practitioner; Physician assistant; Prostate cancer

Year:  2021        PMID: 36238352      PMCID: PMC9555125          DOI: 10.1097/upj.0000000000000249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Pract        ISSN: 2352-0779


  12 in total

1.  The Expanding Role of Advanced Practice Providers in Urologic Procedural Care.

Authors:  Joshua P Langston; Richard Duszak; Venetia L Orcutt; Heather Schultz; Brad Hornberger; Lawrence C Jenkins; Jennifer Hemingway; Danny R Hughes; Raj S Pruthi; Matthew E Nielsen
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Projecting the Urology Workforce Over the Next 20 Years.

Authors:  Maxim J McKibben; E Will Kirby; Joshua Langston; Mathew C Raynor; Matthew E Nielsen; Angela B Smith; Eric M Wallen; Michael E Woods; Raj S Pruthi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Quality improvement initiative to reduce variability and improve stewardship of antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostate needle biopsy.

Authors:  Pedro Recabal; Taehyoung Lee; Emily Vertosick; Michael Manasia; James Eastham; Karim Touijer; Susan K Seo; Massimiliano Spaliviero; Behfar Ehdaie
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Cancer statistics, 2020.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  A Systematic Approach to Discussing Active Surveillance with Patients with Low-risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Behfar Ehdaie; Melissa Assel; Nicole Benfante; Deepak Malhotra; Andrew Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Outcome analysis and patient satisfaction following octant transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective study comparing consultant urologist, specialist registrar and nurse practitioner in urology.

Authors:  A Henderson; D E Andrich; M E Pietrasik; D Higgins; B Montgomery; S E M Langley
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  Long-Term Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Experience.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Nicole Benfante; Ricardo Alvim; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew Vickers; Victor E Reuter; Samson W Fine; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Michal Wiseman; Maha Mamoor; Behfar Ehdaie; Vincent Laudone; Peter Scardino; James Eastham; Karim Touijer
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Nurse-led active surveillance for prostate cancer is safe, effective and associated with high rates of patient satisfaction-results of an audit in the East of England.

Authors:  Estelle Martin; Satyendra Persaud; John Corr; Rowan Casey; Rajiv Pillai
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2018-07-25

9.  A nurse practitioner model for the assessment of suspected prostate cancer referrals is safe, cost and time efficient.

Authors:  Lawrence Drudge-Coates; Vitra Khati; Randolph Ballesteros; Clarissa Martyn-Hemphill; Christian Brown; James Green; Ben Challacombe; Gordon Muir
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2019-12-18

10.  Establishing nurse-led active surveillance for men with localised prostate cancer: development and formative evaluation of a model of care in the ProtecT trial.

Authors:  Julia Wade; Peter N Holding; Susan Bonnington; Leila Rooshenas; J Athene Lane; C Elizabeth Salter; Kate Tilling; Mark J Speakman; Simon F Brewster; Simon Evans; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.