Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 41(3): 562-568, May-June 2015. tab, ilus
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-755860

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACTPurpose:

Literature pertaining to surgical disclosure to the pediatric patient is lacking. We hypothesized parents would find it difficult to disclose urologic surgery to a child.

Materials and Methods:

Parents of patients <5 years old undergoing urologic surgery were contacted for telephone survey. Parents were asked about future plans of surgical disclosure, comfort with disclosure, and any support received.

Results:

98 parents consented to study participation. 87% of surgeries were on the genitalia with 62% being minor genitalia surgery (i.e. circumcision). 70% of parents would tell their child about minor genital surgery while 84% would tell about major genital surgery (p=0.07). 4 of 20 parents of children undergoing hypospadias repair (major genital surgery) did not plan to tell their child about surgery. All parents of children undergoing non-genital surgery would tell. Of all parents planning to tell their children about surgery, only 14% were nervous. 34% of parents would find guidance in talking to their child helpful despite the majority (90%) stating no guidance had ever been provided.

Conclusions:

Parents seem comfortable discussing urologic surgeries with a child but about 1/3 would appreciate further counseling. 20% of parents of children undergoing hypospadias repair hope to avoid telling their child.

.


Subject(s)
Adult , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Disclosure/statistics & numerical data , Genitalia/surgery , Parent-Child Relations , Urologic Surgical Procedures/psychology , Age Factors , Decision Making , Interviews as Topic , Sex Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 34(3): 336-344, May-June 2008. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-489593

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate our experience with tension-free transvaginal tape (TVT) placement for the management of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women who had previously undergone a failed midurethral synthetic sling (MUS) procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten women underwent retropubic TVT insertion for continued or recurrent SUI following a prior MUS procedure. No attempt was made to remove the previously placed sling at the time of surgery. A retrospective chart review was performed to obtain perioperative and follow-up patient information. Post-operatively, each patient completed a mailed incontinence questionnaire to assess self-reported urinary continence outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 women were available for follow-up at a mean period of 16 months (range 6 to 33). Four of the 10 patients achieved complete continence, and another three patients reported significantly improved continence and quality of life. Three women stated that their continence did not improve. CONCLUSIONS: TVT placement may be a viable option for the management of women with persistent or recurrent SUI following an initial MUS procedure.


Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Quality of Life , Self-Assessment , Suburethral Slings , Surveys and Questionnaires , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Follow-Up Studies , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Recurrence , Reoperation , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Suburethral Slings/adverse effects , Suburethral Slings/standards , Treatment Failure , Urodynamics , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/prevention & control , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/psychology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL