Association of Unmet Social Needs With Missed In-Person Urology Clinic Appointments.

INTRODUCTION: Social determinants of health (SDH) are nonbiologic influencers of disease and health care disparities. This study focused on understanding the association between SDH and urology clinic "no-show" visits within a diverse urban population. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients scheduled for urology clinic visits from October 2015 to June 2022 who completed a 10-question social needs screener. For each patient, demographic variables, and number of missed clinic appointments were abstracted. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the association of unmet social needs and no-shows. RESULTS: Of 5761 unique patients seen in clinic, 5293 completed a social needs screener. Respondents were most commonly male (62.8%), Hispanic (50.3%), English-speaking (75.5%), and insured by Medicare (46.0%). Overall, 8.2%, 4.6%, and 6.1% reported 1, 2, and 3+ unmet social needs, respectively. Most patients (61.7%) had 0 no-shows; 38.3% had 1+ no-shows. Between the 0 and 1+ no-show groups, we found significant differences with respect to gender (P =.05), race/ethnicity (P = .002), preferred language (P = .006), insurance payer (P < .001), SDH status (P = .003), and total number of unmet social needs (P = .006). On multivariable analysis, patients concerned about housing quality (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50, P = .002), legal help (OR = 1.53, P = .009), and with 3+ unmet social needs (OR = 1.39, P = .006) were more likely to have 1+ no-shows. CONCLUSIONS: Unmet social needs were associated with increased no-show urology clinic visits. Routine social needs screening could identify at-risk patients who would benefit from services. This may be particularly pertinent for patients with urgent diagnoses or those requiring frequent office visits where missing appointments could impact morbidity and mortality.

Quality of Information for Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence Treatments on YouTube.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of information on YouTube regarding post-prostatectomy incontinence treatments. The 2019 American Urological Association(AUA)/(SUFU) Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine & Urogenital Reconstruction guidelines recommend the placement of a male sling or artificial urinary sphincter. Patient education is essential for appropriate expectations and patient satisfaction. METHODS: The top 100 most relevant (default setting) YouTube videos searched with terms "post-prostatectomy incontinence" and "male stress incontinence" were assessed using the validated DISCERN instrument, Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials, and a misinformation Likert Scale. Videos with poor video/audio quality, duplicates, and non-English videos were excluded. Four independent raters were randomly assigned such that each video had 2 raters. Data was analyzed using multivariate linear regression, and inter-rater reliability was measured using Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: The median DISCERN score was 2.5 with 71% of videos scoring <=3. The median PEMAT Actionability and Understandability scores were 64.6 (range 0-100) and 79.9 (range 52-100), respectively. The median misinformation Likert score was 1 range (1-4). Less than half of the videos discussed realistic treatment outcomes or the risks (39% and 24%, respectively). PEMAT Actionability and risk discussion significantly predicted average DISCERN score (p < .001). There were no significant disagreements between raters. CONCLUSION: Our study shows most videos on post-prostatectomy incontinence had moderate to low quality information and were published by medical professionals. The majority did not sufficiently discuss realistic outcomes and risks, which are hallmarks of informed decision making. This provides an opportunity for the urologic community to create educational materials that adequately supplement shared-decision making for patients treated for post-prostatectomy incontinence.

NCCN Risk Reclassification in Black Men with Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer After Genomic Testing.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of genomic testing in risk-stratifying Black patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 63 Black men deemed eligible for active surveillance based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, who underwent OncotypeDx Genomic Prostate Score testing between April 2016 and July 2020. Nonparametric statistical testing was used to compare relevant features between patients reclassified to a higher NCCN risk after genomic testing and those who were not reclassified. RESULTS: The median age was 66 years and median pre-biopsy PSA was 7.3. Initial risk classifications were: very low risk: 7 (11.1%), low risk: 24(38.1%), favorable intermediate risk: 31(49.2%), and unfavorable intermediate risk: 1 (1.6%). Overall, NCCN risk classifications after Genomic Prostate Score testing were significantly higher than initial classifications (P=.003, Wilcoxon signed-rank). Among patients with discordant risk designations, 28(28/40, 70%) were reclassified to a higher NCCN risk after genomic testing. A pre-biopsy prostate specific antigen of greater than 10 did not have significantly higher odds of HBR (OR:2.16 [95% CI: 0.64,7.59, P=.2). Of favorable intermediate risk patients, 20(64.5%) were reclassified to a higher NCCN risk. Ultimately, 18 patients underwent definitive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of genomic testing in risk stratifying Black men with low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer resulted in overall higher NCCN risk classifications. Our findings suggest a role for increased utilization of genomic testing in refining risk-stratification within this patient population. These tests may better inform treatment decisions on an individualized basis.