TY - JOUR
T1 - Nocturia is often inadequately assessed, diagnosed and treated by physicians
T2 - results of an observational, real-life practice database containing 8659 European and US-American patients
AU - Oelke, Matthias
AU - Anderson, Peter
AU - Wood, Robert
AU - Holm-Larsen, Tove
N1 - © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Clinical Practice Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the quality and timing of the diagnosis and treatment of nocturia in real-life practice in European and US-American patients to obtain better insights into the management of nocturia in different Western healthcare systems. Methods: Data were drawn from the “LUTS Disease Specific Programme,” a real-life survey of physicians and patients in France, Germany, Spain, UK and the USA. Physicians completed a patient record form for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) patients. Patients filled out a self-completion form, indicating – among other items – information on the mean number of day- and night-time voids during the last 7 days, and questions on the management of LUTS in daily practice. Results: In total, 8659 patients were analysed. The majority of patients initially consulted a physician because of worsening of LUTS frequency (43%–58%) or severity (44%–55%). Only 37% of all LUTS diagnoses, regardless of the appearance or severity of nocturia, were based on bladder diaries. Patients took approximately 1 year to consult a medical professional following the onset of LUTS. At the initial visit, most patients received advice on behavioural strategies. Regardless the type of LUTS and physician, 59% of men received α-blockers and 76% of women antimuscarinics. Conclusions: Data show that patients with nocturia and LUTS accept their symptoms for a considerable period before they seek help or ultimately receive treatment. They may therefore be enduring significant negative impact on their quality-of-life which could be avoided. Physicians rarely use bladder diaries and primarily use antimuscarinics (women) or α-blockers (men). Improved awareness of nocturia among patients and physicians could improve the management of nocturia.
AB - Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the quality and timing of the diagnosis and treatment of nocturia in real-life practice in European and US-American patients to obtain better insights into the management of nocturia in different Western healthcare systems. Methods: Data were drawn from the “LUTS Disease Specific Programme,” a real-life survey of physicians and patients in France, Germany, Spain, UK and the USA. Physicians completed a patient record form for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) patients. Patients filled out a self-completion form, indicating – among other items – information on the mean number of day- and night-time voids during the last 7 days, and questions on the management of LUTS in daily practice. Results: In total, 8659 patients were analysed. The majority of patients initially consulted a physician because of worsening of LUTS frequency (43%–58%) or severity (44%–55%). Only 37% of all LUTS diagnoses, regardless of the appearance or severity of nocturia, were based on bladder diaries. Patients took approximately 1 year to consult a medical professional following the onset of LUTS. At the initial visit, most patients received advice on behavioural strategies. Regardless the type of LUTS and physician, 59% of men received α-blockers and 76% of women antimuscarinics. Conclusions: Data show that patients with nocturia and LUTS accept their symptoms for a considerable period before they seek help or ultimately receive treatment. They may therefore be enduring significant negative impact on their quality-of-life which could be avoided. Physicians rarely use bladder diaries and primarily use antimuscarinics (women) or α-blockers (men). Improved awareness of nocturia among patients and physicians could improve the management of nocturia.
U2 - 10.1111/ijcp.12882
DO - 10.1111/ijcp.12882
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 27753248
SN - 1368-504X
VL - 70
SP - 940
EP - 949
JO - British Journal of Clinical Practice
JF - British Journal of Clinical Practice
IS - 11
ER -