ArticleBMC urology2024
Comparative assessment of attitudes and expectations: Iranian patients versus urologists in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Article in BMC urology, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBenign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is common and presents as lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Understanding patient concerns and treatment preferences is essential for effective management. This study aimed to investigate the attitudes, preferences, and expectations of Iranian patients with BPH, and compare them with those of urologists in addressing this condition.
methodsA cohort of patients diagnosed with BPH underwent assessment during their initial visit. Before any counseling, their attitudes, concerns, and expectations regarding benign prostate enlargement were evaluated using semi-structured interviews. Patient responses were analyzed based on educational levels and age. Additionally, correspondence was initiated with thirty urologists who graduated within the past twelve years to assess their attitudes toward BPH, concerns, and treatment approaches. Interview questions were constructed using the Delphi method, and their validity was confirmed. Responses from both groups were analyzed and compared. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney U, and principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation were used for statistical analysis.
resultsThe study comprised 261 patients and 30 urologists. Findings revealed that 86.2% of patients and 86.7% of urologists perceived a lack of sufficient patient knowledge about BPH. Patients across all educational levels and age groups expressed a desire for more information about their condition. Primary concerns among patients included exacerbation of urinary symptoms, potential malignancy, and sexual dysfunction. While patients generally preferred pharmacological treatments, those older than 75 years showed a significantly higher preference for surgical options. Conversely, urologists exhibited greater concern for long-term clinical complications associated with BPH. Results indicated significant parallels between the attitudes of urologists and patients in assessing the multifaceted impact of BPH on patient well-being.
conclusionThis study enhances our understanding of patient attitudes and concerns regarding BPH, thereby facilitating more effective treatment strategies. Our findings encourage urologists to enhance patient perspectives by delivering comprehensive information. Furthermore, the comparison between patient and urologist attitudes towards BPH underscores the importance of tailored care and patient-centered approaches in optimizing outcomes for individuals with BPH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.