Evaluating the acceptability of an online patient decision aid for the surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia

Authors

  • David Bouhadana
  • David-Dan Nguyen
  • Brendan Raizenne
  • Joe Schwarcz
  • Harvey Gordon
  • Bilal Chughtai
  • Dean S. Elterman
  • Luke T. Lavallée
  • Paul Martin
  • Kristen McAlpine
  • Ryan Paterson
  • Hassan Razvi
  • Kevin C. Zorn
  • Naeem Bhojani

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7492

Keywords:

BPH, patient decision aid, LUTS

Abstract

Introduction: The growing number of surgical options available to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), may overwhelm patients and urologists when deciding on an optimal treatment. Therefore, we developed an online patient decision aid (PtDA) that includes all guideline-approved surgical modalities. The objective of this study was to assess the acceptability of the PtDA among former BPH surgery patients and urologists that treat BPH surgically.

Methods: The International Patient Decision Aids Standards were used to develop a PtDA that includes monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), bipolar TURP, GreenLight photovaporization, endoscopic enucleation of the prostate, Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, open retropubic prostatectomy, and robotic simple prostatectomy as management options. Eleven urologists that regularly treat BPH and 19 patients who received BPH surgery were recruited. Alpha-testing was performed using a validated acceptability scoring system.

Results: For all sections of the PtDA, most urologists agreed that the language used was easy to follow (91.9%), that the amount of information provided was adequate (63.6%), that the length of the PtDA was appropriate (63.6%), and that the outcomes reported were correct (81.8%). All 19 patient participants agreed that the language used was easy to follow, and most found that the amount of information provided was adequate (84.2%), that the length of the PtDA was appropriate (84.2%), and that the outcomes reported were well-explained (89.5%).

Conclusions: Our PtDA was found to be acceptable among urologists and patients. These results demonstrate that most of the participants either recommend the use of this tool or plan to incorporate it in their clinical practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2021-08-16

How to Cite

Bouhadana, D. ., Nguyen, D.-D. ., Raizenne, B. ., Schwarcz, J. ., Gordon, H. ., Chughtai, B. ., Elterman, D. S. ., Lavallée, L. T. ., Martin, P. ., McAlpine, K. ., Paterson, R. ., Razvi, H. ., Zorn, K. C. ., & Bhojani, N. . (2021). Evaluating the acceptability of an online patient decision aid for the surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 15(8), 247–54. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7492

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 8 (2021): CUAJ August

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.