Augmented Reality System for Digital Rectal Examination Training and Assessment: System Validation.

BACKGROUND: Digital rectal examination is a difficult examination to learn and teach because of limited opportunities for practice; however, the main challenge is that students and tutors cannot see the finger when it is palpating the anal canal and prostate gland inside the patients. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents an augmented reality system to be used with benchtop models commonly available in medical schools with the aim of addressing the problem of lack of visualization. The system enables visualization of the examining finger, as well as of the internal organs when performing digital rectal examinations. Magnetic tracking sensors are used to track the movement of the finger, and a pressure sensor is used to monitor the applied pressure. By overlaying a virtual finger on the real finger and a virtual model on the benchtop model, students can see through the examination and finger maneuvers. METHODS: The system was implemented in the Unity game engine (Unity Technologies) and uses a first-generation HoloLens (Microsoft Inc) as an augmented reality device. To evaluate the system, 19 participants (9 clinicians who routinely performed digital rectal examinations and 10 medical students) were asked to use the system and answer 12 questions regarding the usefulness of the system. RESULTS: The system showed the movement of an examining finger in real time with a frame rate of 60 fps on the HoloLens and accurately aligned the virtual and real models with a mean error of 3.9 mm. Users found the movement of the finger was realistic (mean 3.9, SD 1.2); moreover, they found the visualization of the finger and internal organs were useful for teaching, learning, and assessment of digital rectal examinations (finger: mean 4.1, SD 1.1; organs: mean 4.6, SD 0.8), mainly targeting a novice group. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed augmented reality system was designed to improve teaching and learning of digital rectal examination skills by providing visualization of the finger and internal organs. The initial user study proved its applicability and usefulness.

Teaching medical students digital rectal examination: a randomized study of simulated model vs rectal examination volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if using a digital rectal examination (DRE) human volunteer improves medical students' confidence in performing DRE in comparison to using a simulated model alone. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Medical students underwent randomization into one of two groups: a control group who underwent standard teaching and an intervention group who underwent standard teaching plus further tuition involving a DRE volunteer. Standard teaching involved a 30-min lecture and a practice DRE on a simulation model. The intervention group additionally observed a tutor demonstrating DRE on a volunteer, then conducted a DRE themselves under supervision. Before and after teaching, both groups completed a survey comprised of three questions. The primary endpoint was confidence in performing a DRE, which was assessed according to the sum of the scores from the three questions. RESULTS: In total, 48 students were randomized, 22 to the control group and 26 to the intervention group. The groups were well matched prior to teaching DRE (P = 0.76) After the DRE tutorial, students in the intervention group were more confident in knowing the indications for DRE (P = 0.001), more confident in their technique for performing DRE (P < 0.001) and more confident in their ability to assess findings accurately at DRE (P < 0.001). The primary outcome measure, overall confidence (sum of the scores from all three questions) in performing DRE, was significantly better in the intervention group (score 10/15 vs 14/15; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that teaching DRE with the assistance of volunteer patients improves inexperienced students' confidence in performing DRE, and the incorporation of such training should be considered in the DRE education programme.

Use of Digital Rectal Examination as an Adjunct to Prostate Specific Antigen in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Guidelines from the NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) advocate digital rectal examination screening only in men with elevated prostate specific antigen. We investigated the effect of prostate specific antigen on the association of digital rectal examination and clinically significant prostate cancer in a large American cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the records of the 35,350 men who underwent digital rectal examination in the screening arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial for the development of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason 7 or greater). Followup was 343,273 person-years. The primary outcome was the rate of clinically significant prostate cancer among men with vs without suspicious digital rectal examination. We performed competing risks regression to evaluate the interaction between time varying suspicious digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen. RESULTS: A total of 1,713 clinically significant prostate cancers were detected with a 10-year cumulative incidence of 5.9% (95% CI 5.6-6.2). Higher risk was seen for suspicious vs nonsuspicious digital rectal examination. Increases in absolute risk were small and clinically irrelevant for normal (less than 2 ng/ml) prostate specific antigen (1.5% vs 0.7% risk of clinically significant prostate cancer at 10 years), clinically relevant for elevated (3 ng/ml or greater) prostate specific antigen (23.0% vs 13.7%) and modestly clinically relevant for equivocal (2 to 3 ng/ml) prostate specific antigen (6.5% vs 3.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Digital rectal examination demonstrated prognostic usefulness when prostate specific antigen was greater than 3 ng/ml, limited usefulness for less than 2 ng/ml and marginal usefulness for 2 to 3 ng/ml. These findings support the restriction of digital rectal examination to men with higher prostate specific antigen as a reflex test to improve specificity. It should not be used as a primary screening modality to improve sensitivity.

Yield and Examiner Dependence of Digital Rectal Examination in Detecting Impaction in Pediatric Functional Constipation.

OBJECTIVES: Guidelines on functional constipation recommend digital rectal examination (DRE) when constipation is doubtful or with a suspicion of organic etiology. The guidelines do not clarify if DRE is mandatory to diagnose impaction. This study aims to determine the frequency of impaction detectable only on DRE among children satisfying Rome III criteria without requiring DRE and also the inter-observer influences on impaction detection by DRE. METHODS: Children between 6 months to 13 years of age, presenting with history suggestive of constipation were assessed. After excluding those with suspicion of organic etiology, those who needed DRE for diagnosis of constipation and those who do not satisfy Rome III criteria without DRE, the rest who satisfied Rome III criteria were assessed for impaction by palpable fecoliths or constipation-associated fecal incontinence. Those without such impaction were randomized to 2 examiners for DRE to diagnose impaction, in the absence of contraindications. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-three children were assessed. One hundred and sixty-nine satisfied Rome III without needing DRE. Forty-eight (28.4%) had impaction detectable without DRE. Among the rest, 28 (30.1%) had impaction by DRE. There was no difference between the frequency of impaction detected by the 2 examiners. Clinical characteristics were similar (P > 0.05) between those with impaction detectable by DRE and those without. CONCLUSIONS: DRE does detect cases of impaction not discernible by other means. Such a finding may be comparable between examiners. These children may be identified by other clinical characteristics. The clinical significance of such a finding needs more understanding from the standpoint of therapeutic choices.

Observance of the practice of digital rectal examination. Survey of general practitioners in East-central Tunisia.

INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination (DRE) is a simple gesture, used for diagnosis of several diseases. However, some general practitioners (GPs) are practicing it less and less often. AIM: To estimate the rate of unrealized DRE and to analyze the factors preventing threir achievement. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study conducted among 105 GPs practicing in Sousse. We used a pre-established pre-tested and self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: We identified 551 DRE that were indicated but unrealized. There was a significant influence between the non-realization of DRE on the one hand, and on the other hand: the lack of experience; the closeness of the specialist; the lack of training and the lack of conviction of the importance of this examination. Embarrassment during the realization of the DRE was felt in 69.3% of cases. Factors associated with this embarrassment were: female practitioner; the young age of the practitioner; the rural practice and the nature of internship placements. CONCLUSION: Although it is a simple and inexpensive gesture, the DRE remains neglected by many physicians. Several factors appear to influence the achievement of the DRE. Ongoing continuing medical education seems necessary, especially as we found a lack of belief in the importance of this examination.

Guideline for referral of patients with suspected prostate cancer by family physicians and other primary care providers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this guideline is to assist FPs and other primary care providers with recognizing features that should raise their suspicion about the presence of prostate cancer in their patients. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: Committee members were selected from among the regional primary care leads from the Cancer Care Ontario Provincial Primary Care and Cancer Network and from among the members of the Cancer Care Ontario Genitourinary Cancer Disease Site Group. METHODS: This guideline was developed through systematic review of the evidence base, synthesis of the evidence, and formal external review involving Canadian stakeholders to validate the relevance of recommendations. REPORT: Evidence-based guidelines were developed to improve the management of patients presenting with clinical features of prostate cancer within the Canadian context. CONCLUSION: These guidelines might lead to more timely and appropriate referrals and might also be of value for informing the development of prostate cancer diagnostic programs and for helping policy makers to ensure appropriate resources are in place.

Screening for prostate cancer: a guidance statement from the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians.

DESCRIPTION: Prostate cancer is an important health problem in men. It rarely causes death in men younger than 50 years; most deaths associated with it occur in men older than 75 years. The benefits of screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test are outweighed by the harms for most men. Prostate cancer never becomes clinically significant in a patient's lifetime in a considerable proportion of men with prostate cancer detected with the PSA test. They will receive no benefit and are subject to substantial harms from the treatment of prostate cancer. The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guidance statement for clinicians by assessing current prostate cancer screening guidelines developed by other organizations. ACP believes that it is more valuable to provide clinicians with a rigorous review of available guidelines rather than develop a new guideline on the same topic when several guidelines are available on a topic or when existing guidelines conflict. The purpose of this guidance statement is to critically review available guidelines to help guide internists and other clinicians in making decisions about screening for prostate cancer. The target patient population for this guidance statement is all adult men. METHODS: This guidance statement is derived from an appraisal of available guidelines on screening for prostate cancer. Authors searched the National Guideline Clearinghouse to identify prostate cancer screening guidelines in the United States and selected 4 developed by the American College of Preventive Medicine, American Cancer Society, American Urological Association, and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation in Europe) instrument was used to evaluate the guidelines. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 1: ACP recommends that clinicians inform men between the age of 50 and 69 years about the limited potential benefits and substantial harms of screening for prostate cancer. ACP recommends that clinicians base the decision to screen for prostate cancer using the prostate-specific antigen test on the risk for prostate cancer, a discussion of the benefits and harms of screening, the patient's general health and life expectancy, and patient preferences. ACP recommends that clinicians should not screen for prostate cancer using the prostate-specific antigen test in patients who do not express a clear preference for screening. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 2: ACP recommends that clinicians should not screen for prostate cancer using the prostate-specific antigen test in average-risk men under the age of 50 years, men over the age of 69 years, or men with a life expectancy of less than 10 to 15 years.

Transparency and reproducibility in data analysis: the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

With the analysis of complex, messy data sets, the statistics community has recently focused attention on "reproducible research," namely research that can be readily replicated by others. One standard that has been proposed is the availability of data sets and computer code. However, in some situations, raw data cannot be disseminated for reasons of confidentiality or because the data are so messy as to make dissemination impractical. For one such situation, we propose 2 steps for reproducible research: (i) presentation of a table of data and (ii) presentation of a formula to estimate key quantities from the table of data. We illustrate this strategy in the analysis of data from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, which investigated the effect of the drug finasteride versus placebo on the period prevalence of prostate cancer. With such an important result at stake, a transparent analysis was important.

Can benign prostatic hyperplasia be identified in the primary care setting using only simple tests? Results of the Diagnosis IMprovement in PrimAry Care Trial.

AIMS: Diagnosis IMprovement in PrimAry Care Trial (D-IMPACT) was a prospective, multicentre epidemiological study in three European countries to identify the optimal subset of simple tests applied in primary care to diagnose benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in men who spontaneously present with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). METHODS: Consecutive male patients aged ≥ 50 years who spontaneously attended their regular general practitioner (GP) office with LUTS were eligible for inclusion if they had not previously undergone BPH diagnostic tests or received treatment for BPH. Patients were assessed on three occasions, twice by their regular GP (visits 1 and 2) and once by a urologist (visit 3). The diagnostic accuracy of each variable was determined using the urologists' final BPH diagnosis (at visit 3) as gold-standard. Independent variables analysed were as follows: age; BPH diagnosis performed by GP in visit 1 (yes/no); probability of BPH diagnosis assessed by GP in visit 1; urinalysis (normal/abnormal); prostate-specific antigen (PSA); International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS); diagnosis of BPH performed by GP in visit 2 (yes/no); and probability of BPH diagnosis assessed by GP in visit 2. Statistically significant variables (p < 0.1) were included in a logistic regression model to identify the best algorithm and describe each test contribution. RESULTS: The most frequent spontaneously reported LUTS were nocturia and weak urinary stream. BPH study prevalence was 66.0% (95%CI: 62.3-69.5) and 32% of patients were at risk of BPH progression (PSA > 1.5 ng/ml and prostate volume ≥ 30 cm(3)). Among the independent variables analysed, only age, IPSS and PSA showed a statistically significant relationship with BPH diagnosis. In a logistic regression model including age, IPSS, PSA and probability of BPH (based on physical examination and symptoms), positive predictive value (PPV) was 77.1%. Exclusion of BPH probability resulted in a PPV of 75.7%. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnostic algorithm including only objective variables (age, IPSS and PSA), easily implemented in any GP office, allows GPs to accurately diagnose BPH in approximately three-quarters of patients spontaneously reporting LUTS.

Detection rate and clinical pattern of prostate cancer in Kuwait: a single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the detection rate and clinical pattern of prostate cancer in Kuwait. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred and fifty-three males suspected of having prostate cancer based on elevation of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 4 ng/ml underwent transrectal-ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy of the prostate between January 2003 and January 2008; these formed the study group. Analysis of prostate cancer was based on age, prostate volume, PSA level and on finding any abnormality based on a combination of the diagnostic tools. RESULTS: A diagnosis of prostate cancer was histologically confirmed in 42 (27.4%) patients. In those aged <55, 56-65, 66-75 and >76 years, the detection rates were 16.7, 17.6, 33.3 and 40.7%, respectively. In those with prostate volumes of >71, 51-70, 31-50 and <30 g, the detection rates were 18.2, 23.8, 30.8 and 42.9%, respectively. When the PSA levels were divided into groups of 4-10, 10-20, 20-100 and >100 ng/ml, the cancer detection rate was 11.8, 20.5, 47.1 and 83.3%, respectively. When 1, 2 and 3 of the 3 diagnostic tools (digital rectal examination, PSA, TRUS) were abnormal, the detection rate was 15.6, 27.9 and 80%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that the prostate cancer rate differs according to the region and that the rate was low in our center. Higher PSA and higher number of diagnostic tools with abnormal findings were associated with a higher incidence of prostate cancer.

[Indication for and execution of rectal examination in children with suspected appendicitis]. / Szemlélet- és gyakorlatváltozás a rectalis digitális vizsgálat indikációjában és kivitelezésben appendicitis acuta gyanúja esetén gyermekkorban.

Digital rectal examination is considered a non-evident diagnostic procedure in suspected appendicitis. It is rather unpleasant for children and there is a wide range of laboratory and imaging modalities available to contribute to the decision making in case a surgical intervention is necessary. In recent years digital rectal examination is not routinely used prior to surgery, however it may remain a useful screening method for patients with unclear clinical diagnosis. In such cases considering the important moral and legal arguments about digital rectal examination, we consider performing it under general anaesthesia.

The effect of removal of point-of-care fecal occult blood testing on performance of digital rectal examinations in the emergency department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine whether removing point-of-care fecal occult blood testing from the emergency department (ED) is associated with a decrease in documented digital rectal examinations. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational chart review study examining documented digital rectal examinations, before and after removal of a point-of-care fecal occult blood test, on all adult patients who presented to our ED with chief complaints that were likely to warrant a fecal occult blood test (intervention-sensitive). We studied the 6 months immediately before and after switching from bedside fecal occult blood testing to immunohistochemical laboratory fecal occult blood testing. We compared the results with those from a similar cohort of patients who presented during the same period, with chief complaints that would warrant a digital rectal examination for reasons other than fecal occult blood test (intervention-insensitive). RESULTS: A total of 4,981 and 5,557 patients met our inclusion criteria during the before and after intervention periods, respectively. We observed an overall reduction of 10% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8% to 12%) in digital rectal examinations in patients with intervention-sensitive chief complaints. The largest relative decreases in digital rectal examinations were observed in patients with chief complaints of abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, and diarrhea. Smaller decreases were observed in gastrointestinal bleeding, constipation, and rectal problem. There was an overall reduction of 3% (95% CI 0% to 5%) in documented digital rectal examinations in intervention-insensitive chief complaints. After controlling for all covariates, digital rectal examinations decreased in the postintervention period for intervention-sensitive (odds ratio 0.44 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.50]) and, to a lesser extent, for intervention-insensitive (odds ratio 0.67 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.86]) conditions. CONCLUSION: Removal of point-of-care fecal occult blood test from our ED was associated with a reduction in digital rectal examinations, particularly among chief complaints that may require fecal occult blood testing.

PSA cancer screening: a case for shared decision-making.

Whether to screen for prostate cancer using PSA testing is a difficult decision for many men. Here's the information you need to help them make an educated choice.

Cancer detection rates and inter-examiner variability of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Software-based MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy depends on the coordination of several steps, and inter-examiner differences could influence the results. The aim of this bicentric prospective study was to compare the detection rates of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (TG) and systematic biopsy (SB), and the detection rates of examiners with different levels of previous experience in prostate biopsy. METHODS: A total of 419 patients underwent MRI based on a suspicion of prostate cancer with elevated PSA levels. MRI was positive in 395 patients (221 in the first biopsy group [FB] and 174 in the repeated biopsy group [RB]). A subsequent TG, followed by a SB, was performed on these patients by four different examiners. RESULTS: In the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, a significant difference was found for TG+SB against SB in the RB group (35.1% vs. 25.3%, P=0.047). In the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, the SB had a significantly higher detection rate than TG in both subgroups (FB: 11.9% vs. 4.7%, P=0.008; RB: 13.8% vs. 6.9%, P=0.034). A significant difference was found between the four examiners in the FB for TG (P=0.028), SB (P=0.036), and TG+SB (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: MRI/TRUS TG in combination with SB had significantly higher detection rates than SB in the RB group only. Differences in detection rates between examiners were dependent on the level of previous experience with TRUS guided biopsy.