RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of diagnostic tools available at the primary care setting [medical history (MH), I-PSS questionnaire, digital rectal examination (DRE) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) evaluation] for the diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 363 patients with suspected prostatic disease referred to urology outpatient clinics were included. For every subject initial BPH diagnosis was collected at each of the following sequential procedures: 1) MH; 2) I-PSS; 3) DRE; and 4) PSA. Each of these diagnostic decisions were compared to a final diagnosis (gold standard) reached after the addition of urinary sediment analysis, ultrasonographic assessment of residual volume and prostatic volume, and peak urinary flow measurement. A descriptive analysis was undertaken: validity and concordance between each diagnostic step and the gold standard was calculated. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of diagnosis based on MH+I-PSS+DRE+PSA with respect to the gold standard were 91%, 65%, 95% and 50%, respectively. The percentage of agreement and kappa index between both diagnostic strategies were 87.9% and 0.5, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Concordance between BPH initial diagnosis based on MH+I-PSS+DRE+PSA and diagnosis based on a full range of tests was high, thus allowing recommending the use of this group of initial diagnostic procedures, which are available to the primary care physician, not only as a first diagnostic step in patients with suspected BPH, but also as a valid strategy to prevent unnecessary delay in its initial management and to facilitate appropriate referral from primary to specialized care.