Tags

Main Content

Top Content

Directory of Key words from the Journal and the latest article from it.

Socioeconomic factorsView Articles

Volume 20, Number 3Original Research

Accuracy in 24-hour Urine Collection at a Tertiary Center

Dean G AssimosKyle WoodCarter BoydDustin WhitakerOmotola AshorobiRobert OsterLisa HarveyRoss P Holmes

There is a paucity of studies addressing the accuracy of 24-hour urine collection for assessing stone risk parameters. Collection accuracy is thought to be essential for assigning optimal therapy for stone prevention. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with accurate and inaccurate collections. During a 2-year period (2015-2016), 241 stone formers completed 24-hour urine collections. They were divided into accurate collectors (AC), defined as at least one accurate urine collection, and inaccurate collectors (IC). Accuracy was assessed by 24-hour urine creatinine (Cr) excretion indexed to body weight (normal: males, 20-25 mg Cr/kg; females, 15-20 mg Cr/kg). Demographic data analyzed included age, gender, race, insurance status, partner status, income, and education. Statistical analysis methods included the chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, and the two-group t-test. Average age was 50.7 years at the time of collection; 50.2% were men, 86% were white, and 14% were black. Overall, 51.0% of collections were inaccurate. There was no statistical significance between AC and IC for gender (P = 0.85), race (P = 0.90), insurance status (P = 0.85), recurrence (P = 0.87), stone type (P = 0.57), education (P = 0.35), income (P = 0.42), or poverty (P = 0.35). Older age (P = 0.017) and having a partner (P = 0.022) were significantly associated with AC. The high rate of inaccurate 24-hour urine collections is a concern. The only factors we identified as influencing collection accuracy were age and partner status. These results underscore the importance of developing methods to improve the accuracy of collecting 24-hour urine samples. [Rev Urol. 2018;20(3):119–124 doi: 10.3909/riu0807] © 2018 MedReviews®, LLC

Kidney stonesMetabolic evaluation24-hour urine collectionaccuracyDemographicsSocioeconomic factors

SpecializationView Articles

Volume 18, Number 3Review Articles

Urology Group Compensation and Ancillary Service Models in an Era of Value-based Care

Health Care Economics

Neal D ShoreDana Jacoby

Changes involving the health care economic landscape have affected physicians’ workflow, productivity, compensation structures, and culture. Ongoing Federal legislation regarding regulatory documentation and imminent payment-changing methodologies have encouraged physician consolidation into larger practices, creating affiliations with hospitals, multidisciplinary medical specialties, and integrated delivery networks. As subspecialization and evolution of care models have accelerated, independent medical groups have broadened ancillary service lines by investing in enterprises that compete with hospital-based (academic and nonacademic) entities, as well as non–physician-owned multispecialty enterprises, for both outpatient and inpatient services. The looming and dramatic shift from volume- to value-based health care compensation will assuredly affect urology group compensation arrangements and productivity formulae. For groups that can implement change rapidly, efficiently, and harmoniously, there will be opportunities to achieve the Triple Aim goals of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, while maintaining a successful medical-financial practice. In summary, implementing new payment algorithms alongside comprehensive care coordination will assist urology groups in addressing the health economic cost and quality challenges that have been historically encountered with fee-for-service systems. Urology group leadership and stakeholders will need to adjust internal processes, methods of care coordination, cultural dependency, and organizational structures in order to create better systems of care and management. In response, ancillary services and patient throughput will need to evolve in order to adequately align quality measurement and reporting systems across provider footprints and patient populations. [Rev Urol. 2016;18(3):143-150 doi: 10.3909/riu0726] © 2016 MedReviews®, LLC

Independent practiceCollaborationValue-based careSpecializationCompensation

Volume 8, Supplement 1Review Articles

Fused Radioimmunoscintigraphy for Treatment Planning

Prostate Cancer Imaging

Rodney J EllisDeborah A Kaminsky

Advances in imaging technologies, including computerized tomography (CT) and single-photon emission tomography (SPECT), are improving the role of imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment. Hybrid (SPECT/CT) imaging, in particular, shows an increased sensitivity for identification of prostate cancer. Published studies have also recently proposed a new paradigm in the administration of radiation therapy for prostate cancer, favoring doseescalation strategies to improve tumor control for localized disease. Conventional dose-escalation protocols have previously relied primarily on margin extension to the entire prostate gland to achieve dose-escalation; extending increased risk to radiosensitive normal structures. A newer strategy proposes use of advanced imaging to confine dose-escalation to biological target volumes identified on capromab pendetide SPECT/CT-fused image sets or imageguided radiation therapy (IGRT). This strategy defines a shift in radiation dosimetry and planning from uniform glandular prescription dosing with doseescalation applied generically to the peripheral regions and margin extension; to dose-escalation confinement to discrete regions of known disease as defined by focal uptake on radioimmunoscintigraphy fusion with anatomic image sets, with minimal margin extension. The introduction of advanced imaging for IGRT in prostate cancer has also introduced an improved capability for the early-identification of patients at risk for metastatic disease, where more aggressive therapeutic interventions may prove beneficial. [Rev Urol. 2006;8(suppl 1):S11-S19]

Prostate cancerRadiotherapyBrachytherapyProstaScintSPECT/CTBiological targetvolumesSurvival

SphincterView Articles

Volume 20, Number 2Review Articles

Botulinum Toxin Use in Neurourology

Systematic Review

Benjamin M BruckerGregory VurtureBenoit PeyronnetXavier GaméVictor W Nitti

The use of botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) has revolutionized the treatment of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD) over the past three decades. Initially, it was used as a sphincteric injection for detrusor sphincter dyssynergia but now is used mostly as intradetrusor injection to treat neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO). Its use is supported by high-level-of-evidence studies and it has become the gold-standard treatment for patients with NDO refractory to anticholinergics. Several novelties have emerged in the use of BTX-A in neurourology over the past few years. Although onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) remains the only BTX-A for which use is supported by large, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials (RCT), and is therefore the only one to be licensed in the United States and Europe, a second BTX-A, abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®, Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Basking Ridge, NJ), is also supported by high-level-of-evidence studies. Other innovations in the use of BTX-A in neurourology during the past few years include the BTX switch (from abobotulinumtoxinA to onabotulinumtoxinA or the opposite) as a rescue option for primary or secondary failures of intradetrusor BTX-A injection and refinements in intradetrusor injection techniques (number of injection sites, injection into the trigone). There is also a growing interest in long-term failure of BTX-A for NDO and their management, and a possible new indication for urethral sphincter injections. [Rev Urol. 2018;20(2):84–93 doi: 10.3909/riu0792] © 2018 MedReviews®, LLC

Botulinum toxinNeurogenic detrusor overactivitySphincterInjection