Abstract
Purpose: After radical prostatectomy continence is commonly defined as no pads except a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. We evaluated the association of pad status and urinary quality of life to determine whether security and 1 pad status differ from pad-free status to better define 0 pads as the post-prostatectomy standard. Materials and Methods: A total of 500 consecutive men underwent robot assisted radical prostatectomy from October 2003 to July 2007. Data were collected prospectively and entered into an electronic database. Postoperatively men completed self-administered validated questionnaires including questions on 1) daily pad use (0, security, 1, or 2 or more), 2) urine leakage (daily, about once weekly, less than once weekly or not at all), 3) urinary control (none, frequent dribbling, occasional dribbling or total control), 4) American Urological Association symptom score and 5) urinary quality of life. Results: Postoperatively men who indicated 0 pad use had a mean ± SE symptom score of 5.8 ± 0.3 and pleased quality of life (1.16 ± 0.08). In contrast, men with a security pad and 1 pad had a symptom score of 7.6 ± 0.7 and 9.2 ± 0.6 but mixed quality of life (2.78 ± 0.18 and 3.41 ± 0.15, respectively, p <0.0005). Conclusions: Results show a significant decrease in quality of life between no pads (1.16 or pleased), a security pad and 0 or 1 pad (2.78 and 3.41 or mixed, respectively). Findings do not support defining continence with a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. Continence should be strictly defined as 0 pads.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1464-1468 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Journal of Urology |
| Volume | 183 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 1 2010 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- incontinence pads
- prostate
- prostatectomy
- quality of life
- questionnaires
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Urology
Cite this
Continence Definition After Radical Prostatectomy Using Urinary Quality of Life : Evaluation of Patient Reported Validated Questionnaires. / Liss, Michael A.; Osann, Kathryn; Canvasser, Noah; Chu, William; Chang, Alexandra; Gan, Jennifer; Li, Roger; Santos, Rosanne; Skarecky, Douglas; Finley, David S.; Ahlering, Thomas E.
In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 183, No. 4, 01.04.2010, p. 1464-1468.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Continence Definition After Radical Prostatectomy Using Urinary Quality of Life
T2 - Evaluation of Patient Reported Validated Questionnaires
AU - Liss, Michael A.
AU - Osann, Kathryn
AU - Canvasser, Noah
AU - Chu, William
AU - Chang, Alexandra
AU - Gan, Jennifer
AU - Li, Roger
AU - Santos, Rosanne
AU - Skarecky, Douglas
AU - Finley, David S.
AU - Ahlering, Thomas E.
PY - 2010/4/1
Y1 - 2010/4/1
N2 - Purpose: After radical prostatectomy continence is commonly defined as no pads except a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. We evaluated the association of pad status and urinary quality of life to determine whether security and 1 pad status differ from pad-free status to better define 0 pads as the post-prostatectomy standard. Materials and Methods: A total of 500 consecutive men underwent robot assisted radical prostatectomy from October 2003 to July 2007. Data were collected prospectively and entered into an electronic database. Postoperatively men completed self-administered validated questionnaires including questions on 1) daily pad use (0, security, 1, or 2 or more), 2) urine leakage (daily, about once weekly, less than once weekly or not at all), 3) urinary control (none, frequent dribbling, occasional dribbling or total control), 4) American Urological Association symptom score and 5) urinary quality of life. Results: Postoperatively men who indicated 0 pad use had a mean ± SE symptom score of 5.8 ± 0.3 and pleased quality of life (1.16 ± 0.08). In contrast, men with a security pad and 1 pad had a symptom score of 7.6 ± 0.7 and 9.2 ± 0.6 but mixed quality of life (2.78 ± 0.18 and 3.41 ± 0.15, respectively, p <0.0005). Conclusions: Results show a significant decrease in quality of life between no pads (1.16 or pleased), a security pad and 0 or 1 pad (2.78 and 3.41 or mixed, respectively). Findings do not support defining continence with a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. Continence should be strictly defined as 0 pads.
AB - Purpose: After radical prostatectomy continence is commonly defined as no pads except a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. We evaluated the association of pad status and urinary quality of life to determine whether security and 1 pad status differ from pad-free status to better define 0 pads as the post-prostatectomy standard. Materials and Methods: A total of 500 consecutive men underwent robot assisted radical prostatectomy from October 2003 to July 2007. Data were collected prospectively and entered into an electronic database. Postoperatively men completed self-administered validated questionnaires including questions on 1) daily pad use (0, security, 1, or 2 or more), 2) urine leakage (daily, about once weekly, less than once weekly or not at all), 3) urinary control (none, frequent dribbling, occasional dribbling or total control), 4) American Urological Association symptom score and 5) urinary quality of life. Results: Postoperatively men who indicated 0 pad use had a mean ± SE symptom score of 5.8 ± 0.3 and pleased quality of life (1.16 ± 0.08). In contrast, men with a security pad and 1 pad had a symptom score of 7.6 ± 0.7 and 9.2 ± 0.6 but mixed quality of life (2.78 ± 0.18 and 3.41 ± 0.15, respectively, p <0.0005). Conclusions: Results show a significant decrease in quality of life between no pads (1.16 or pleased), a security pad and 0 or 1 pad (2.78 and 3.41 or mixed, respectively). Findings do not support defining continence with a security pad or 0 to 1 pad. Continence should be strictly defined as 0 pads.
KW - incontinence pads
KW - prostate
KW - prostatectomy
KW - quality of life
KW - questionnaires
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949278687&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77949278687&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.009
DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 20171689
AN - SCOPUS:77949278687
VL - 183
SP - 1464
EP - 1468
JO - Journal of Urology
JF - Journal of Urology
SN - 0022-5347
IS - 4
ER -