Chaperones Utilization in Clinical Practice: Intimate and Sensitive Physical Examination Best Practice Strategies and Concepts in Modern Urological Medicine.

The intention of utilizing chaperones during sensitive physical exams is to show respect to the patient, while simultaneously providing protection to both the patient and the medical provider. Despite clinical practice recommendations to offer chaperones for sensitive urologic exams, there is no data regarding the consistency of chaperone utilization. Our aim was to summarize the patient and provider perspectives on the role of chaperones in urology as well as identify barriers to implement chaperone consistency. In the present investigation, we conducted a systematic review of prospective, case-control, and retrospective studies and followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for data reporting. Studies were identified from PubMed, MEDLINE, and PMC using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms "chaperones, patient", "chaperones, medical", and keywords "chaperones", and "urology". Studies were included if they addressed patient/provider perspectives on chaperone utilization in urology specifically and were excluded if they investigated perspectives on chaperone utilization in other specialties. Preliminary study identification yielded 702 studies, 9 of which were eligible for this review after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 4 studies focused on the patient perspective and 5 focused on the provider perspective. The percentage of patients that did not have a chaperone present during their urologic exam ranged from 52.9-88.5%. A greater proportion of these patients were male. Patients (59%) prefer a family member compared to a staff member as a chaperone. Physicians (60%) prefer staff member chaperones compared to family members. One study reported that 25.6% of patients did not feel comfortable to ask for a chaperone if they were not offered one. Two studies reported the percentage of patients who believed chaperones should be offered to all urology patients, ranging from 73-88.4%. Three studies reported the use of chaperones in the clinic which ranged from 5-72.5%. Two studies reported chaperone utilization documentation, ranging between 16-21.3%. Two studies reported the likelihood of chaperone utilization depending on gender of the physician, showing that male physicians were more likely to utilize chaperones and were 3x more likely to offer chaperones to their patients compared to female physicians. Research suggests that there are differing perspectives between patients and physicians regarding the specific role and benefits chaperones offer during a sensitive urologic examination, as well as differences in preferences of who should perform the role of the chaperone. While more work needs to be done to bridge the divide between clinical practice and patient/physician preferences, the act of offering chaperones to urologic patients, regardless if they want to utilize a chaperone for their examination is respectful of patient privacy and decision making.

Interactions with Astroglia Influence the Shape of the Developing Dendritic Arbor and Restrict Dendrite Growth Independent of Promoting Synaptic Contacts.

Astroglia play key roles in the development of neurons, ranging from regulating neuron survival to promoting synapse formation, yet basic questions remain about whether astrocytes might be involved in forming the dendritic arbor. Here, we used cultured hippocampal neurons as a simple in vitro model that allowed dendritic growth and geometry to be analyzed quantitatively under conditions where the extent of interactions between neurons and astrocytes varied. When astroglia were proximal to neurons, dendrites and dendritic filopodia oriented toward them, but the general presence of astroglia significantly reduced overall dendrite growth. Further, dendritic arbors in partial physical contact with astroglia developed a pronounced pattern of asymmetrical growth, because the dendrites in direct contact were significantly smaller than the portion of the arbor not in contact. Notably, thrombospondin, the astroglial factor shown previously to promote synapse formation, did not inhibit dendritic growth. Thus, while astroglia promoted the formation of presynaptic contacts onto dendrites, dendritic growth was constrained locally within a developing arbor at sites where dendrites contacted astroglia. Taken together, these observations reveal influences on spatial orientation of growth as well as influences on morphogenesis of the dendritic arbor that have not been previously identified.