Enabling national improvement in quality of care for renal colic.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of a clinical audit conducted by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) of ureteric stone care pathways, with results reported with reference to national quality standards. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The BAUS conducted a clinical audit of all patients presenting as an emergency to 107 hospitals in England during November 2020 with ureteric stones. All patients were followed up until 31 March 2021 and the inpatient and outpatient management received was recorded. RESULTS: Data for 2192 patients across 117 units were submitted. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) number of patients per unit was 16 (9-27); 70% of patients were male and the median (IQR) patient age was 46 (34-59) years. Initial management was conservative treatment for 70% of patients. Overall, primary shockwave lithotripsy was performed in 34% of patients and primary ureteroscopy in 23% of cases when surgical intervention was required to treat the stone. However, 40% of patients in whom active intervention was appropriate underwent placement of a temporizing ureteric stent rather than undergo definitive surgical intervention at the outset. Female patients were less likely to have a computed tomography (CT) scan of the kidneys, ureters and bladder performed within 24 h of presentation (13% vs 7.3% for men [chi-squared P = 0.01]) and to be given correct analgesia (66% vs 73% for men [chi-squared P = 0.03]). Patients aged 60 years or older were also significantly less likely to be offered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug analgesia appropriately. In total, 87% of patients had their calcium measured within the last 2 years and 73% of patients had evidence of being offered stone prevention diet and fluid advice. CONCLUSIONS: The audit demonstrates that the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Quality Standards are both measurable and achievable. However, there was considerable variation in the delivery of these standards, including with regard to sex and age, highlighting inequalities for patient care across the UK.

UK national bladder outlet obstruction surgery snapshot audit.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the preoperative assessment and perioperative outcomes of men undergoing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) surgery in the UK. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of all men undergoing BOO surgery in 105 UK hospitals over a 1-month period. The study included 1456 men, of whom 42% were catheter dependent prior to undergoing surgery. RESULTS: There was no evidence that a frequency-volume chart or urinary symptom questionnaire had been completed in 73% or 50% of men, respectively in the non-catheter-dependent group. Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was the most common BOO surgical procedure performed (38%). Monopolar TURP was the next most prevalent modality (23%); however, minimally invasive BOO surgical procedures combined accounted for 17% of all procedures performed. Of the cohort 5% of men had complications within 30 days of surgery, only 1% had Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III complications. Less than 1% of the cohort received a blood transfusion after BOO surgery and 2% were re-admitted to hospital after their BOO surgery. In total only 4% of the whole cohort were catheter dependent after BOO surgery. Pre- and postoperative paired International Prostate Symptom Score scores reviewed suggest that minimally invasive surgical procedures achieved comparable levels of improvement in both symptoms and bother at 3 months postoperatively in men who were not catheter dependent preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a substantial shift in the available choice of procedure for BOO surgery around the UK in recent years. However, men can be reassured that overall BOO surgery treatments are safe and effective. Evidence of adherence to guidelines in the preoperative assessment of men with lower urinary tract symptoms undergoing surgery was poorly documented and must be improved.

Improving Standards of Care through the Publication of Surgeon Identifiable Outcome Data in Urology.

Consultant Outcomes Publication aims to drive up standards of care by greater transparency and peer comparison of surgical practice and outcomes. This is despite difficulties of data entry and bias, and potential for risk avoidance and diminished training.