MP85-10 PROSTATE CANCER REHABILITATION: OUTCOMES OF A SEXUAL HEALTH CLINIC
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Medical, Hormonal & Non-surgical Therapy II1 Apr 2018MP85-10 PROSTATE CANCER REHABILITATION: OUTCOMES OF A SEXUAL HEALTH CLINIC Andrew Matthew, Leah Jamnicky, Kristen Currie, Anika Gentile, John Trachtenberg, Shabbir Alibhai, Antonio Finelli, Neil Fleshner, Gideon Yang, Lisa Osqui, Joyce Davison, and Dean Elterman Andrew MatthewAndrew Matthew More articles by this author , Leah JamnickyLeah Jamnicky More articles by this author , Kristen CurrieKristen Currie More articles by this author , Anika GentileAnika Gentile More articles by this author , John TrachtenbergJohn Trachtenberg More articles by this author , Shabbir AlibhaiShabbir Alibhai More articles by this author , Antonio FinelliAntonio Finelli More articles by this author , Neil FleshnerNeil Fleshner More articles by this author , Gideon YangGideon Yang More articles by this author , Lisa OsquiLisa Osqui More articles by this author , Joyce DavisonJoyce Davison More articles by this author , and Dean EltermanDean Elterman More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.2870AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Radical prostatectomy (RP) leaves 45-75% of patients with long-term sexual dysfunction (SD). Approximately 60% of patients report significant emotional distress related to their SD that may progress to maladjustment in their relationships with partners. Despite high levels of effectiveness, 30-50% of patients who turn to sexually assistive aids after RP discontinue use of the aids within one year. The available research exploring this gap between effectiveness and ongoing use supports a broader perspective of SD that includes psychological, behavioural, social and interpersonal factors. In addressing this need we have developed the Prostate Cancer Rehabilitation Clinic (PCRC), at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada. The aim of the PCRC is to assist patients and couples in achieving optimal sexual health and maintaining intimacy. METHODS The PCRC emphasizes multidisciplinary intervention teams, the active participation of the partner, and a broad-spectrum bio-psychosocial intervention approach. The program includes seven clinic visits across two years and provides both biomedical and psychological support for SD. We conducted a retrospective study comparing Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) patient-reported outcomes from patients who had RP in 2006 (prior to PCRC, n=304) and 2012 (after PCRC, n=342). RESULTS Patients who had a RP in the year of 2012 were 1.9 times more likely to have sexual function 2 years post-surgery compared to patients who had RP in 2006 (35.8% vs 19.2%, P < 0.001). Patients who attended the PCRC were more likely to take pro-erectile medications 2 year post-surgery (86.2% vs 38%) and had a stable level of intimacy and anxiety over the 2 year course. These results were maintained when potential confounders across comparison years were controlled for, including introduction of robotic-RP, changes in surgical staff, and disease characteristics. Patients and partners who attended the PCRC also reported a very high rate of satisfaction (95.8% for patients and 99.6% for partners) with the care they received at the clinic. CONCLUSIONS The PCRC has proved beneficial to RP patients and their partners in achieving better sexual health, continued use of pro-erectile medications, and maintenance of intimacy and low anxiety. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e1173 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Andrew Matthew More articles by this author Leah Jamnicky More articles by this author Kristen Currie More articles by this author Anika Gentile More articles by this author John Trachtenberg More articles by this author Shabbir Alibhai More articles by this author Antonio Finelli More articles by this author Neil Fleshner More articles by this author Gideon Yang More articles by this author Lisa Osqui More articles by this author Joyce Davison More articles by this author Dean Elterman More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,030 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».