Change in Patients' Perspectives after Education on the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Jung Yoon Kang; Sun Il Kim; Hae Won Lee; Do Hwan Seong; Jin Seon Cho

doi:10.4111/kju.2009.50.4.340

Journal List > Korean J Urol > v.50(4) > 1005310

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kang, Kim, Lee, Seong, and Cho: Change in Patients' Perspectives after Education on the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Original Article

Urological Oncology

Korean Journal of Urology

Korean Journal of Urology 2009; 50(4): 340-348.

Published online: 27 April 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2009.50.4.340

Change in Patients' Perspectives after Education on the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Jung Yoon Kang, Sun Il Kim¹, Hae Won Lee², Do Hwan Seong³, Jin Seon Cho⁴

Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Eulji University, Seoul, Korea.

¹Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Ajou University, Suwon, Korea.

²Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Dongkook University, Ilsan, Korea.

³Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon, Korea.

⁴Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea.

Correspondence to: Jin Seon Cho. Department of Urology, Hallym University Sacred Hospital, 896, Pyungchon-dong, Dongan-gu, Anyang 431-070, Korea. TEL: 031-380-3851, FAX: 031-380-3852, s315@hallym.or.kr

Received 26 November 2008 Accepted 24 March 2009

Abstract

Purpose

We assessed patients' understanding of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and their perspectives on the management of BPH through a questionnaire and evaluated changes in perspective after patient education.

Materials and Methods

From December 2007 to February 2008, 5 university hospitals participated in the study. A self-administered questionnaire was developed and was completed by patients before and after the patients read the patient's guide. The questionnaire was composed of 22 questions, which were grouped into 4 different categories. The patient's guide was written in everyday words and was based on the American Urological Association patient's guide.

Results

A total of 141 patients who visited the urology department for treatment of symptoms suggestive of BPH participated in the survey. Understanding about the statement, "BPH does not progress to become prostate cancer" was increased after reading the patient's guide (35.57%→ 73.87%, p<0.001). The most preferred treatment option was drug therapy (45.4%→56.7%). Among the desirable effects of drug therapy, the patients' preferences were amelioration of symptoms within a few weeks (51.1%→ 48.9%), reduction in prostate size (18.4%→24.1%), prevention of acute urinary retention (14.2%→13.5%), and prevention of prostate surgery (7.8% →8.5%). The potential side effect of drug therapy that patients were most concerned about was generalized weakness. Patients' reluctance to undergo surgery was increased after reading the patient guide (9.9%→23.4%, p=0.002).

Conclusions

Patients have considerable misunderstanding about BPH. More efforts should be exercised in patient education and in the development of public education programs. Because patients expect not only rapid symptom improvement but also a reduction in prostate size, physicians should consider these points when treating patients with BPH.

Keywords: Prostatic hyperplasia, Patients, Attitude, Education

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

Patients' preference for surgery. The question asked was, "Would you undergo an operation for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) if the operation was more effective than other treatment modalities?".

Table 1

Proportion of patients who chose a particular treatment option as the most preferred treatment option (p=0.025)^a

^a: statistical significance was done by Pearson's chi-square test

Table 2

Grading of treatment option according to preference

^a: most preferred: 4, 2nd preferred: 3, 3rd preferred: 2, least preferred: 1, ^b: statistical significance was done by Wilcoxon signed rank test

Table 3

Proportion of patients who considered a particular desired effect to be the most important desired effects in drug therapy (p=0.642)^a

AUR: acute urinary retention, ^a: statistical significance was done by Pearson's chi-square test

Table 4

Grading of desired effects in drug therapy according to preference

AUR: acute urinary retention, ^a: most preferred: 4, 2nd preferred: 3, 3rd preferred: 2, least preferred: 1, ^b: statistical significance was done by Wilcoxon signed rank test

Table 5

Proportion of patients who chose each of the 3 treatment methods as the most preferred option (p=0.454)^a

^a: statistical significance was done by Pearson's chi-square test

Table 6

Proportion of patients who considered a particular side effect to be the most important potential side effects in drug therapy (p=0.345)^a

^a: statistical significance was done by Pearson's chi-square test

Notes

This study was supported by the 2008 MSD KOREA LTD. Research Fund.

References

1. Lee HL, Seo JW, Kim WJ. The prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia: community-based study in Chungbuk province. Korean J Urol. 1999. 40:1500–1505.

2. Bosch JL, Hop WC, Kirkels WJ, Schroder FH. Natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia: appropriate case definition and estimation of its prevalence in the community. Urology. 1995. 46(3 Suppl A):34–40.

3. Boyle P, Robertson C, Mazzetta C, Keech M, Hobbs FD, Fourcade R, et al. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms in men and women in four centres. The UrEpik study. BJU Int. 2003. 92:409–414.

4. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the international continence society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002. 21:167–178.

5. AUA Practice Guidelines Committee. AUA guideline on management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (2003). Chapter 1: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2003. 170:530–547.

6. Emberton M, Marberger M, de la Rosette J. Understanding patient and physician perceptions of benign prostatic hyperplasia in Europe: The Prostate Research on Behaviour and Education (probe) Survey. Int J Clin Pract. 2008. 62:18–26.

7. Verhamme KM, Dieleman JP, Bleumink GS, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom MC, Artibani W, et al. Incidence and prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia in primary care-the Triumph project. Eur Urol. 2002. 42:323–328.

8. Chung BH. Medical management for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Korean J Urol. 2007. 48:233–243.

9. Oesterling JE. Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Medical and minimally invasive treatment options. N Engl J Med. 1995. 332:99–109.

10. Marberger M, Harkaway R, de la Rosette J. Optimising the medical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 2004. 45:411–419.

11. McConnell JD, Roehrborn CG, Bautista OM, Andriole GL Jr, Dixon CM, Kusek JW, et al. The long-term effect of doxazosin, finasteride, and combination therapy on the clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med. 2003. 349:2387–2398.

12. Roehrborn CG, Marks LS, Fenter T, Freedman S, Tuttle J, Gittleman M, et al. Efficacy and safety of dutasteride in the four-year treatment of men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2004. 63:709–715.

13. Harkaway RC. What are the views of patients and urologists on benign prostatic hyperplasia and its management? Eur Urol. 2007. 6(Suppl 6):454–459.

14. Kawakami J, Nickel JC. Acute urinary retention and surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: the patient's perspective. Can J Urol. 1999. 6:819–822.

15. Teillac P. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: patients' perception of medical treatment and their expectations. Results of a french survey involving patients treated with finasteride. Therapie. 2002. 57:473–478.

16. Watson V, Ryan M, Brown CT, Barnett G, Ellis BW, Emberton M. Eliciting preferences for drug treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2004. 172:2321–2325.

17. Kaplan S, Naslund M. Public, patient, and professional attitudes towards the diagnosis and treatment of enlarged prostate: a landmark national US survey. Int J Clin Pract. 2006. 60:1157–1165.

TOOLS

Similar articles