Evaluation of ‘Visual prostate symptom score’ in men with benign enlargement of prostate in a tertiary care center in midwestern Nepal

  • Dipesh Kumar Gupta Department of Surgery, Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj Hospital, Nepalgunj

Abstract

Introduction: Quantification of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in patients with benign enlargement of prostate (BEP) is required to initiate and regulate treatment. Among many, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is standard though it is time consuming and difficult to understand by many patients. A recent Visual Prostate Symptom Score (VPSS) which is presumed to be simpler and well understood by patients with lower educational status has been in use. Objectives: The aim of the study is to evaluate VPSS in patients with BEP in our institution.Materials and methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted in Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj. In a total of 79 patients, 25 patients of LUTS because of other causes were excluded and 54 patients clinically diagnosed with BEP were enrolled for the study over a period of one year. Symptom evaluation was done in all with both IPSS and VPSS and uroflowmetry parameters were also recorded. The IPSS and VPSS were compared with each other and also with uroflowmetry parameters. Results: Mean age of the patients was 67 years and mean prostate volume was 48 gm. The patients who mostly were farmers had median eighth grade of education. Fourteen were illiterates and 40 were literate patients. Significant number of patients required assistance of a medical personnel to complete IPSS (p= <0.001) including those in literate group as well (p= <0.001). Time taken to complete VPSS was significantly less (p= 0.019). Total IPSS correlated with total VPSS ((r= +0.36; p=0.007). There was negative and significant correlation of VPSS with uroflowmeter parameters while IPSS failed to do so.Conclusion: VPSS is an easy and reliable tool to assess symptom severity in cases of BEP presenting with LUTS. It has the added advantage of utility in assessment of LUTS in patients with lower educational status. Moreover, the patients take shorter time to complete the questionnaire.

Author Biography

Dipesh Kumar Gupta, Department of Surgery, Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj Hospital, Nepalgunj
Department of Surgery Institute of Medicine,

References

1. Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, Ewing LL. The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol. 1984; 132(3):474-9.
2. Thorpe A, Neal D. Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Lancet. 2003 Apr 19;361(9366):1359-67.
3. Barry MJ. Evaluation of symptoms and quality of life in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2001; 58(6 Suppl 1):25-32; discussion
4. Donovan JL. The measurement of symptoms, quality of life and sexual function. BJU Int. 2000; 85 Suppl 1:10-9.
5. Mebust W RRSFVA. Correlations between pathology,clinical symptoms and the course of the disease. . Proceedings of the lnternational Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Geneva: WHO. 1991:51-62.
6. Kaplan SA. Update on the american urological association guidelines for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Rev Urol. 2006; 8 Suppl 4:S10-7.
7. Barry MJ, Girman CJ, O'Leary MP, Walker-Corkery ES, Binkowitz BS, Cockett AT, et al. Using repeated measures of symptom score, uroflowmetry and prostate specific antigen in the clinical management of prostate disease. Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment Outcomes Study Group. J Urol. 1995; 153(1):99-103.
8. Rodrigues Netto N, Jr., de Lima ML, de Andrade EF, Apuzzo F, da Silva MB, Davidzon IM, et al. Latin American study on patient acceptance of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in the evaluation of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 1997; 49(1):46-9.
9. MacDiarmid SA, Goodson TC, Holmes TM, Martin PR, Doyle RB. An assessment of the comprehension of the American Urological Association Symptom Index. J Urol. 1998; 159(3):873-4.
10. Johnson TV, Abbasi A, Ehrlich SS, Kleris RS, Schoenberg ED, Owen-Smith A, et al. Patient misunderstanding of the individual questions of the American Urological Association symptom score. J Urol. 2008; 179(6):2291-4; discussion 4-5.
11. Netto Junior NR, de Lima ML. The influence of patient education level on the International Prostatic Symptom Score. J Urol. 1995; 154(1):97-9.
12. Huh JS, Kim YJ, Kim SD. Prevalence of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia on Jeju Island: Analysis from a Cross-sectional Community-based Survey. World J Mens Health. 2012; 30(2):131-7.
13. van der Walt CL, Heyns CF, Groeneveld AE, Edlin RS, van Vuuren SP. Prospective comparison of a new visual prostate symptom score versus the international prostate symptom score in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 2011; 78(1):17-20.
14. Afriansyah A, Gani YI, Nusali H. Comparison between visual prostate symptom score and international prostate symptom score in males older than 40 years in rural Indonesia. Prostate Int. 2014; 2(4):176-81.
15. Ceylan Y, Gunlusoy B, Degirmenci T, Kozacioglu Z, Bolat D, Minareci S. Is new visual prostate symptom score useful as International Prostate Symptom Score in the evaluation of men with lower urinary tract symptoms? A prospective comparison of 2 symptom scores in Turkish society. Urology. 2015; 85(3):653-7.
16. Selekman RE, Harris CR, Filippou P, Chi T, Alwaal A, Blaschko SD, et al. Validation of a Visual Prostate Symptom Score in Men With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in a Health Safety Net Hospital. Urology. 2015; 86(2):354-8.
17. Ganpule AP, Desai MR, Desai MM, Wani KD, Bapat SD. Natural history of lower urinary tract symptoms: preliminary report from a community-based Indian study. BJU Int. 2004; 94(3):332-4.
18. Tsang KK, Garraway WM. Prostatism and the burden of benign prostatic hyperplasia on elderly men. Age Ageing. 1994; 23(5):360-4.
19. List of countries by literacy rate [cited 2014]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_World_Factbook
20. Wessels SG, Heyns CF. Prospective evaluation of a new visual prostate symptom score, the international prostate symptom score, and uroflowmetry in men with urethral stricture disease. Urology. 2014; 83(1):220-4.
21. Wadie BS, Ibrahim EH, de la Rosette JJ, Gomha MA, Ghoneim MA. The relationship of the International Prostate Symptom Score and objective parameters for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction. Part I: when statistics fail. J Urol. 2001; 165(1):32-4.
22. el Din KE, Koch WF, de Wildt MJ, Kiemeney LA, Debruyne FM, de la Rosette JJ. Reliability of the International Prostate Symptom Score in the assessment of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and/or benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 1996; 155(6):1959-64.
23. Homma Y, Yamaguchi T, Kondo Y, Horie S, Takahashi S, Kitamura T. Significance of nocturia in the International Prostate Symptom Score for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2002; 167(1):172-6.
Published
2017-11-06
How to Cite
GUPTA, Dipesh Kumar. Evaluation of ‘Visual prostate symptom score’ in men with benign enlargement of prostate in a tertiary care center in midwestern Nepal. J Soc Surg Nep, [S.l.], v. 18, n. 2, p. 6-10, nov. 2017. ISSN 2392-4772. Available at: <http://jssn.org.np/index.php?journal=jssn&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=228>. Date accessed: 24 feb. 2021.
Section
Original Article

Keywords

Benign enlargement of prostate, International Prostate Symptom Score, Visual Prostate Symptom Score