Understanding the Health Characteristics and Treatment Choices of Older Men with Stress Urinary Incontinence

Exploring the Hidden Struggles: A Qualitative Insight into Urinary Incontinence Among Prostate Cancer Survivors Post-Surgery

Objective

This study aimed to explore the experiences and challenges of prostate cancer patients suffering from urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative research design was employed. Purposeful sampling was used to select 22 prostate cancer patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and experienced urinary incontinence after surgery. These patients were interviewed between August to October 2023 at a tertiary B-grade hospital's pelvic floor center in Shanghai. The data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analyzed using content analysis to identify and refine themes.

Results

The experiences of urinary incontinence in patients can be categorized into four main themes: (1) Daily life disturbances (including 4 sub-themes: sleep disorders, fluid intake restriction, travel inconvenience, loss of sexual life); (2) Negative emotional experiences (including 4 sub-themes: perceived discrimination, concerns about recovery, loss of confidence in life, doubts about the surgical decision); (3) Social withdrawal (including 2 sub-themes: reduced desire for social interaction, decreased ability to socialize); (4) Limited support obtained (including 4 sub-themes: reliance on personal experience, seeking help from relatives and friends, difficulty discerning online information, lack of professional guidance).

Conclusion

Postoperative urinary incontinence in prostate cancer patients presents a multidimensional experience. Healthcare professionals need to pay attention to these patients' daily life, psychological state, and social interactions. Integrating various resources to provide professional support and rehabilitation guidance is crucial.

How older men live with stress urinary incontinence: Patient experience and navigation to treatment

OBJECTIVES

To explore the context in which older men navigate treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following prostate surgery by characterizing lived experience of men with symptomatic SUI.

SUBJECTS/PATIENTS AND METHODS

Mixed method study using surveys and semistructured interviews to examine a cohort of men who underwent evaluation for treatment of postprostatectomy SUI.

RESULTS

Thirty-six men were interviewed after consultation for SUI and 31 had complete quantitative clinical data. Twenty-six underwent surgery and 10 chose no surgical intervention. In qualitative interviews, respondents experienced substantial decline in quality of life due to incontinence citing concerns associated with use of pads and worrying about incontinence. Most patients reported "workarounds"-efforts to mitigate or manage incontinence including Kegels, physical therapy, and garments. Participants also reported lifestyle changes including less strenuous physical activity, less sexual activity, and/or fewer social gatherings. Patients then described a "breaking point" where incontinence workarounds were no longer sufficient. After seeking evaluation, men described challenges in exploring treatment for SUI, including access to care and provider knowledge of treatment options.

CONCLUSION

In a novel study of patients living with SUI a predictable lived experience was observed that culminated in a desire for change or "breaking point." In all men, this led to treatment-seeking behaviors and for many it led to SUI intervention. Despite effective treatments, patients continue to meet barriers gaining access to SUI evaluation and treatment.

A scoping review of risk factors for urinary incontinence in older men

BACKGROUND

Most epidemiological studies have not systematically identified or categorized risk factors for urinary incontinence (UI) in older men, despite a higher prevalence than in younger men. Considering the burden of UI, an understanding of risk factors can inform cost-effective prevention/treatment programs. This scoping review aimed to identify and categorise risk factors for UI in older men, identify gaps in the evidence, and opportunities for future research.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) method for scoping reviews guided the conduct and reporting of this review alongside the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews checklist. JBI's Population, Concept, and Context approach framed the inclusion criteria (all evidence sources on UI risk factors that included older men [65 +]). We employed JBI's three-step search strategy, which included a limited initial search in Ovid MEDLINE, a detailed comprehensive database search, and a search of reference lists of included studies, Google Scholar and grey literature. There were no restrictions on language, study type, or publication date. Two independent reviewers screened, selected, and extracted eligible studies. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles that met the inclusion criteria identified 98 risk factors across six categories. Behavioural risk factors, reported by only two studies, were the least investigated of all the categories, whereas medical factors/diseases were the most investigated. No genetic factors were documented. The top five risk factors were increasing age/advanced age (n = 12), Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (n = 11), Diabetes Mellitus (n = 11), Detrusor overactivity (n = 10), limitation in physical function/ADL disability (n = 10), increased Body Mass Index (BMI)/overweight/obesity (n = 8), Dementia (n = 8), and Parkinson's disease (n = 7).

CONCLUSION

There is a dearth of evidence to describe the role behavioural risk factors have in UI in older men. These factors may play a role in health promotion and disease prevention in this area.

REGISTRATION

A protocol detailing the methods was developed and published, and is registered in the Open Science Framework [Feb 07 2023; https://osf.io/xsrge/ ].

The relationship between frailty, incontinence severity, and treatment decisions for men with post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence: a mixed methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Frailty is common among urology patients in general as well as among men seeking evaluation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), with 6.1% of men undergoing artificial urinary sphincter placement considered frail. It is unclear if and how patient views on frailty and incontinence severity impact decision-making with regards to SUI treatment.

METHODS

We undertook a mixed methods analysis to evaluate the intersection of frailty, incontinence severity, and treatment decision-making is presented. To do so, we utilized a previously published cohort of men undergoing evaluation for SUI at the University of California, San Francisco between 2015 and 2020, selecting those who had evaluation with timed up and go test (TUGT), objective measures of incontinence, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A subset of these participants had additionally undergone semi-structured interviews, and these interviews were re-examined to thematically code them with a focus on the impact of frailty and incontinence severity on SUI treatment decision-making.

RESULTS

Among the original cohort of 130 patients, 72 had an objective measure of frailty and were included in our analysis; 18 of these individuals had corresponding qualitative interviews. Common themes identified included (I) impact of incontinence severity on decision-making; (II) the interaction between frailty and incontinence; (III) the impact of comorbidity on treatment decision-making; and (IV) age as a construct of frailty and impact on surgical choice and/or recovery. Direct quotations regarding each theme provides insight into patients' views and drivers of SUI treatment decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of frailty on treatment decision-making for patients with SUI is complex. This mixed methods study highlights the variety of patient views on frailty with regards to surgical intervention for male SUI. Urologists should make a concerted effort to personalize patient counseling for SUI management and take time to understand each patient's perspective in order to individualize SUI treatment decision-making. More research is needed to help identify factors that influence decision-making for frail male patients with SUI.