ReviewIrish journal of medical science2023
Introduction of an advanced nurse practitioner (ANP)-led male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) clinic and development of integrated referral pathway.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIreland's population is living longer, and the prevalence of any LUTS is estimated to be 63-83% in adult men, increasing with age. Ireland has one of the lowest urologists per population ratio in Europe, at approximately 1:127,027. The patients waiting the longest are those with routine benign conditions such as men with LUTS. The impact on quality of life for men experiencing LUTS can be profound.
methodsSláintecare funded an ANP post in TUH to develop an integrated referral pathway for male LUTS and develop a secondary care nurse-led clinic for LUTS and tackle the ever increasing new and return waiting lists. The initial focus of this role was on reducing pre-existing outpatient (OP) waiting lists. This is a review of the first 12-month outcomes of this ANP post.
resultsA total of 410 new patients were assessed over the 12-month period. The mean waiting time from referral to review was 24 months; however, some referrals dated back to 2014. Four hundred forty-two return patients were reviewed in the 12-month period. All these patients were waiting longer than 18 months for a return appointment. In absence of the ANP-led clinic, there was no capacity for any of these patients to be reviewed in the general urology clinics. Overall outcomes were as follows: 38% were given advice and education and discharged. Treatment was initiated in 42% and follow-up arranged. Physical review was deemed necessary for 11% of patients. Only 6% of patients reviewed required referral back to consultants' clinic.
conclusionThis study demonstrates the safety, efficacy and financial advantage of an ANP-led clinic for adult men presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms previously triaged by a consultant urologist.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35715664What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.