4.4 Article

Development of a Clinically Relevant Men's Health Phenotype and Correlation of Systemic and Urologic Conditions

期刊

UROLOGY
卷 114, 期 -, 页码 77-81

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.12.035

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE To develop a clinically relevant men's health phenotype and investigate the correlation between severity of urologic symptoms and systemic health conditions METHODS Retrospective chart review was performed for men seeking care for benign prostatic hypertrophy, erectile dysfunction or chronic prostatitis or chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Urologic symptoms were assessed with the International Prostate Symptom Score, Sexual Health Inventory for Men, and National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Score. Each was graded as absent or mild (0), moderate (1), or severe (2) and totaled for a urologic score (US). Seven comorbidities with known impact on urologic symptoms were similarly graded (0-02 for each) and totaled for a systemic score (SS). These domains were anxiety, cardiovascular, testosterone deficiency, insulin (diabetes), obesity, neurologic, and sleep apnea. RESULTS The study included 415 men with median age of 53.8 (range 19-092). Mean total US was 2.1 (range 0-06) and mean SS was 4.1 (0-012). There was a strong correlation between US and SS (Spearman Rho = 0.37, P <.00001) which was consistent regardless of age. The hierarchy of systemic condition impact on US was cardiovascular>neurologic>diabetes>anxiety>sleepapnea>obesity>testosterone. By cluster analysis the tightest correlations were age with cardiovascular, anxiety with CPPS, and diabetes with erectile dysfunction. CONCLUSION Systemic health conditions correlate strongly with urologic symptoms in men who present for urologic care. Phenotyping with ACTIONS (anxiety, cardiovascular, testosterone deficiency, insulin, obesity, neurologic, sleep apnea) can identify modifiable conditions that may impact urologic symptoms and outcome of interventions. Future validation in the general population is needed. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据