+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

The inflatable penile prosthesis, reoperation and patient satisfaction: a comparison of statistics obtained from patient record review with statistics obtained from intensive followup search



The inflatable penile prosthesis, reoperation and patient satisfaction: a comparison of statistics obtained from patient record review with statistics obtained from intensive followup search



Journal of Urology 131(5): 894-895



Of 179 patients who received the inflatable penile prosthesis 43 per cent have required reoperation, 60 per cent of which were performed for mechanical failure. An attempt to evaluate the adequacy of chart review in assessing current function and patient satisfaction was made by comparing reports obtained by chart review to those obtained by direct patient interview. Results showed that if chart review alone was used malfunction would have been underestimated by 13 per cent and patient satisfaction overestimated by 21 per cent. The importance of direct followup in evaluating patients with the inflatable penile prosthesis is demonstrated.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 044661671

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 6708222

DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)50698-9


Related references

Long-term followup of and patient satisfaction with the Dynaflex self-contained inflatable penile prosthesis. Journal Of Urology. 158(2): 456-459, 1997

Analysis of reoperation in the patient with inflatable penile prosthesis. Journal of Urology 143(4 SUPPL): 408A, 1990

Long-term patient-reported satisfaction with different inflatable penile prosthesis: Comparison between AMS 700CX and Coloplast Titan. Revista Internacional de Andrologia 16(3): 112-118, 2018

Comparison of a new length measurement technique for inflatable penile prosthesis implantation to standard techniques: outcomes and patient satisfaction. Journal of Sexual Medicine 8(9): 2640-2646, 2012

The advantage of a two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis in the transplant and elderly patient population Patient and partner satisfaction results. Journal of Urology 165(5 Suppl.): 254, 2001

Comparison between AMS 700™ CX and Coloplast™ Titan inflatable penile prosthesis for Peyronie's disease treatment and remodeling: clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Journal of Sexual Medicine 10(11): 2855-2860, 2014

Prospective evaluation of patient satisfaction, and surgeon and patient trainer assessment of the Coloplast titan one touch release three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis. Journal of Sexual Medicine 9(9): 2467-2474, 2013

High patient satisfaction of inflatable penile prosthesis insertion with synchronous penile plication for erectile dysfunction and Peyronie's disease. Journal of Sexual Medicine 11(6): 1593-1598, 2014

Patient satisfaction with Mentor inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology 37(6): 531-539, 1991

Five-year followup of the Scott inflatable penile prosthesis and comparison with semirigid penile prosthesis. Journal of Urology 140(6): 1428-1430, 1988

Patient and partner satisfaction after AMS inflatable penile prosthesis implant. Journal of Sexual Medicine 7(1 Pt 1): 304-309, 2010

Patient-partner satisfaction levels with the inflatable penile prosthesis. JAMA 243(17): 1714, 1980

Inflatable penile prosthesis: follow-up study of patient-partner satisfaction. Urology 14(6): 583-587, 1979

Physician and patient satisfaction with the new AMS 700 momentary squeeze inflatable penile prosthesis. Journal of Sexual Medicine 6(6): 1773-1778, 2009

Patient and partner satisfaction with the Mentor Alpha-1 inflatable penile prosthesis. Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology 39(1): 66-68, 2005