RESUMO
Background: Post-vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) completion rates after vasectomy are poor, and minimizing the need for an additional in-person visit may improve compliance. We hypothesized that providing PVSA specimen cup at time of vasectomy instead of at a postoperative appointment might be associated with higher PVSA completion rates. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study with historical control using medical records of all patients seen by a single provider for vasectomy consultation between October 2016 and June 2022. All patients who underwent vasectomy were included. Patients who underwent vasectomy prior to 05/01/2020 had PVSA specimen cup given at postoperative appointment two weeks following vasectomy, and those who underwent vasectomy after 05/01/2020 were given PVSA specimen cup at time of vasectomy. PVSA completion, demographic, and clinical outcomes data were collected. Logistic regressions were used to investigate associations between PVSA completion rates and timing of PVSA specimen cup provision. Results: There were no significant differences among study cohorts across all patient demographics analyzed, including age, body mass index (BMI), age of primary partner, presence of children, and history of prior genitourinary infection. A total of 491 patients were seen for vasectomy consultation between October 2016 and June 2022; among these patients, 370 underwent vasectomy. Of these, 173 (46.8%) patients underwent vasectomy prior to 05/01/2020 and were given PVSA specimen cup at postoperative visit; 197 (53.2%) patients underwent vasectomy after 05/01/2020 and were given PVSA specimen cup at vasectomy. Providing PVSA specimen cup at time of vasectomy was associated with higher odds of PVSA completion than providing PVSA specimen cup at postoperative visit [62.4% vs. 49.7%; odds ratio (OR) =1.68; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 2.55]. Adjusting for all identified confounders excludes 35 (9.5%) patients without a primary partner and shows no statistically significant association in cup timing [adjusted OR (aOR) =1.53; 95% CI: 0.98, 2.39]. Adjusting for all identified confounders except age of primary partner revealed timing of specimen cup provision at time of vasectomy was associated with higher odds of PVSA completion (aOR =1.64; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.52). Conclusions: PVSA specimen cup provision at time of vasectomy versus at postoperative appointment is associated with higher rates of PVSA completion in this retrospective cohort study.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has fueled widespread incorporation of telehealth into urology practices. Vasectomy consultation via telehealth is convenient and improves access to care for male contraception. However, it does not allow for physical examination, inherently leading to possible day-of-procedure cancellations due to unforeseen anatomic concerns. This study aimed to compare vasectomy completion rates between patients undergoing virtual vs in-person consultation. METHODS: All patients seen by a single provider at NYU Langone Health for vasectomy consultation between October 2016 and June 2022 were included in the study. Most patients seen before March 2020 had in-person consultations, whereas the majority of patients seen afterwards had virtual consultations without option for in-person visit due to the emergence of COVID-19. All patients seen virtually were examined in a consult room prior to being prepped for the vasectomy in the procedure room. Visit type, demographic information, and clinical outcomes data were collected for all patients. A chi-square test was used to compare the rate of vasectomy completion between those with in-person and virtual consultation. Analysis was performed using R, version 4.0.5. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-one patients were seen by a single provider for vasectomy consultation between October 2016 and June 2022. One hundred ninety-seven (40.1%) consultations were performed virtually and 294 (59.9%) consultations were performed in person. Three hundred seventy (75.4%) of all patients seen for consultation (both virtual and in person) ultimately underwent vasectomy. There was no evidence of difference in rate of completing vasectomy after virtual (75.6%) and in-person (75.2%) consultation (P = .91). Two of the 197 (1%) patients who consulted virtually had their vasectomy procedures cancelled on the day of the procedure based on their preoperative exam; one because of abnormal epididymal sensitivity after prior scrotal infection, the other because of a history of orchiopexy that the patient was not aware of until the surgeon started inquiring about scrotal scars present. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of physical examination, virtual vasectomy consultation is both feasible and effective, with rates of vasectomy completion comparable to traditional in-person consultation.
