U.S. primary care physician perceptions on barriers to providing guideline-driven care for UTI and recurrent UTI: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTI) affect almost two-thirds of all women during their lives and many experience recurrent infections. There are evidence-based guidelines from multiple international societies for evaluation and treatment; however, recent claims-based analyses have demonstrated that adherence to these guidelines is poor. This study seeks to understand the barriers experienced by U.S. primary care providers (PCPs) to providing guideline-based care for UTI and recurrent UTI (rUTI). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews of 18 PCPs, recruited from the greater Los Angeles area, examined real-world clinical management of UTI/rUTI episodes, decisions to refer to subspecialty care, and resources guiding counseling and management. Grounded theory methodology served to analyze interview transcripts and identify preliminary and major themes. RESULTS: Participants expressed the desire to obtain urine cultures for each cystitis episode, but felt pressured to make compromises by patient demands or barriers to care. PCPs had lower thresholds to empirical treatment if patients had a history of rUTIs, were elderly, or declined evaluation. Laboratory data was minimally utilized in clinical decision-making: urinalyses were infrequently considered when interpreting culture data. PCPs treated a broad set of urologic and non-urologic symptoms as UTI, even with negative cultures. PCPs did not feel comfortable initiating UTI prophylaxis, instead seeking specialist evaluation for anatomic causes. They were unaware of management guidelines, typically utilizing UpToDate® as their primary resource. Few evidence-based UTI prevention interventions were recommended by providers. CONCLUSIONS: Low availability of succinct and clear professional guidelines are substantial barriers to appropriate UTI/rUTI care. Poor useability of clinical guidance documents results in substantial confusion about the role of preventative measures and additional diagnostic testing. Difficulties in patient access to care providers lead to expectations for presumptive treatment. Future studies are needed to determine if improved educational materials for providers and/or management algorithms can improve guideline concordance of UTI management.

Pudendal Block at the Time of Transvaginal Prolapse Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The utility of pudendal nerve blocks (PNBs) at the time of transvaginal surgery is mixed in the literature. No published study has evaluated the efficacy of PNB since the widespread adoption of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if PNB, in addition to ERAS measures, at the time of vaginal reconstructive surgery reduces opioid use in the immediate postoperative period. STUDY DESIGN: In this randomized, blinded, controlled trial, women scheduled for transvaginal multicompartment prolapse repair were randomized to bilateral PNB before incision with 20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine versus usual care. Primary outcome was opioid use in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) for the first 24 hours. The study was powered to detect a 5.57-MME difference in opioid use in the first 24 hours between groups. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were randomized from January 2020 to April 2022. The PNB and control groups were well matched in demographic and surgical data. There was no difference in opioid use in first 24 hours between the control and PNB groups (8 [0-20] vs 6.7 [0-15]; P = 0.8). Median pain scores at 24 and 48 hours did not differ between groups (4 ± 2 vs 3 ± 3; P = 0.44) and 90% of participants were satisfied with pain control across both groups. Time to return to normal activities (median, 10 days) was also not different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Because pain satisfaction after transvaginal surgery in the era of ERAS is high, with overall low opioid requirements, PNB provides no additional benefit.

The Persistency Index: a novel screening tool for identifying myofascial pelvic floor dysfunction in patients seeking care for lower urinary tract symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Patients with myofascial pelvic floor dysfunction often present with lower urinary tract symptoms, such as urinary frequency, urgency, and bladder pressure. Often confused with other lower urinary tract disorders, this constellation of symptoms, recently termed myofascial urinary frequency syndrome, is distinct from other lower urinary tract symptoms and optimally responds to pelvic floor physical therapy. A detailed pelvic floor myofascial examination performed by a skilled provider is currently the only method to identify myofascial urinary frequency syndrome. Despite a high influence on quality of life, low awareness of this condition combined with no objective diagnostic testing leads to the frequent misdiagnosis or underdiagnosis of myofascial urinary frequency syndrome. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a screening measure to identify patients with myofascial urinary frequency syndrome (bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to myofascial pelvic floor dysfunction) from patient-reported symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: A population of patients with isolated myofascial urinary frequency syndrome was identified by provider diagnosis from a tertiary urology practice and verified by standardized pelvic floor myofascial examination and perineal surface pelvic floor electromyography. Least Angle Shrinkage and Selection Operator was used to identify candidate features from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire, Female Genitourinary Pain Index, and Pelvic Floor Distress Index predictive of myofascial urinary frequency syndrome in a pooled population also containing subjects with overactive bladder (n=42), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (n=51), and asymptomatic controls (n=54) (derivation cohort). A simple, summated score of the most discriminatory questions using the original scaling of the Pelvic Floor Distress Index 5 (0-4) and Genitourinary Pain Index 5 (0-5) and modified scaling of Female Genitourinary Pain Index 2b (0-3) had an area under the curve of 0.75. As myofascial urinary frequency syndrome was more prevalent in younger subjects, the inclusion of an age penalty (3 points added if under the age of 50 years) improved the area under the curve to 0.8. This score was defined as the Persistency Index (possible score of 0-15). The Youden Index was used to identify the optimal cut point Persistency Index score for maximizing sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Using a development cohort of 215 subjects, the severity (Pelvic Floor Distress Index 5) and persistent nature (Female Genitourinary Pain Index 5) of the sensation of incomplete bladder emptying and dyspareunia (Female Genitourinary Pain Index 2b) were the most discriminatory characteristics of the myofascial urinary frequency syndrome group, which were combined with age to create the Persistency Index. The Persistency Index performed well in a validation cohort of 719 patients with various lower urinary tract symptoms, including overactive bladder (n=285), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (n=53), myofascial urinary frequency syndrome (n=111), controls (n=209), and unknown diagnoses (n=61), exhibiting an area under the curve of 0.74. A Persistency Index score ≥7 accurately identified patients with myofascial urinary frequency syndrome from an unselected population of individuals with lower urinary tract symptoms with 80% sensitivity and 61% specificity. A combination of the Persistency Index with the previously defined Bladder Pain Composite Index and Urge Incontinence Composite Index separated a population of women seeking care for lower urinary tract symptoms into groups consistent with overactive bladder, interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome, and myofascial urinary frequency syndrome phenotypes with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 82%. CONCLUSION: Our study recommends a novel screening method for patients presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms to identify patients with myofascial urinary frequency syndrome. As telemedicine becomes more common, this index provides a way of screening for myofascial urinary frequency syndrome and initiating pelvic floor physical therapy even before a confirmatory pelvic examination.

Sacrospinous Fixation and Vaginal Uterosacral Suspension-Evaluation in Uterine Preservation Surgery.

IMPORTANCE: Vaginal hysteropexy can be performed via the uterosacral or the sacrospinous ligament(s), but little data exist comparing these routes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare prolapse recurrence, retreatment, and symptoms along with the incidence of adverse events between patients undergoing vaginal uterosacral hysteropexy and sacrospinous hysteropexy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent vaginal uterosacral or sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) between 2015 and 2019. Anatomic failure was the primary outcome, defined as prolapse beyond the hymen. Composite failure was defined as anatomic failure, bulge symptoms, and/or retreatment for prolapse. RESULTS: At 4 geographically diverse referral centers, 147 patients underwent SSHP and 114 underwent uterosacral hysteropexy. The 1-year follow-up rate was 32% (83/261) with no difference between groups. There were 10 (3.8%) anatomic failures: 3 (2%) sacrospinous and 7 (6.1%) uterosacral ( P = 0.109). There was no difference in bulge symptoms (9.9%), composite failure (13%), or median prolapse stage (2).The overall incidence of complications was low (7%; 95% confidence interval, 4.12%-10.43%) with a higher rate of ureteral kinking in the uterosacral group (7% vs 1.4%, P = 0.023). With a median follow-up of 17 months, 4.6% underwent subsequent hysterectomy and 6.5% had treatment for uterine/cervical pathology. CONCLUSIONS: One year after hysteropexy, 1 in 3 patients were available for follow-up, and there were no differences in prolapse recurrence between patients who underwent uterosacral hysteropexy versus SSHP. The incidence of adverse events was low, and less than 5% of patients underwent subsequent hysterectomy for prolapse.

Does Rectocele on Defecography Equate to Rectocele on Physical Examination in Patients With Defecatory Symptoms?

OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to determine the association between rectocele size on defecography and physical examination in symptomatic patients. Our secondary objective was to describe the associations between both defecography and physical examination findings with defecatory symptoms and progression to surgical repair of rectocele. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all patients referred to a female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery clinic with a diagnosis of rectocele based on defecography and/or physical examination at a single institution from 2003 to 2017. Patients who did not have defecatory symptoms, did not undergo defecography imaging, or did not have a physical examination in a female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery clinic within 12 months of defecography imaging were excluded. RESULTS: Of 200 patients, 181 (90.5%) had a rectocele diagnosed on defecography and 170 (85%) had a rectocele diagnosed on physical examination. Pearson and Spearman tests of correlation both showed a positive relationship between the rectocele size on defecography and rectocele stage on physical examination; however, one was not reliable to predict the results of the other (Pearson correlation = 0.25; Spearman ρ = 0.29). The strongest predictor of surgery was rectocele stage on physical examination (P < 0.001). Size of rectocele on defecography was not a strong independent predictor for surgery (P = 0.01), although its significance improved with the addition of splinting (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that rectocele on defecography does not necessarily equate to rectocele on physical examination in patients with defecatory symptoms. Rectocele on physical examination was more predictive for surgery than rectocele on defecography.