ArticleCureus2025
Outpatient Local Anaesthetic Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Four-Year Patient-Experience Audit (January 2021-January 2025).
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransperineal prostate biopsy performed under local anaesthesia in the outpatient setting is increasingly being adopted. Patient-reported experience is central to service quality but is less frequently described than diagnostic or safety outcomes.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to audit four years of patient-reported experience after outpatient local anaesthetic transperineal biopsy (LATP) in routine clinical practice.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective audit of consecutive patient feedback forms completed after LATP between January 2021 and January 2025 at a single centre. A five-item questionnaire captured overall positive experience, staff courtesy, clarity of communication, mention of significant pain during/immediately after biopsy, and free-text suggestions.
resultsA total of 471 feedback forms were analysed. Of these, overall positive experience was recorded in 268 (56.9%), staff courtesy in 227 (48.2%), and clear communication in 86 (18.3%). Mentions of significant pain occurred in 14 (3.0%). Waiting-time concerns were recorded in six (1.3%), dignity concerns in four (0.8%), and suggestions for improvement in 27 (5.7%). Year-specific counts of "significant pain" were 0/109 (0.0%) in 2021, 6/104 (5.8%) in 2022, 6/130 (4.6%) in 2023, 1/90 (1.1%) in 2024, and 1/38 (2.6%) in January 2025.
conclusionsAcross four years, clinic-based LATP yielded high proportions of positive experience indicators and a low frequency of patient-mentioned significant pain. Findings support the feasibility and acceptability of clinic-based LATP, with opportunities to further improve communication and flow.
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.