Next-generation Solutions: Are Patients Ready for Electronic Artificial Urinary Sphincters for Male Incontinence?

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY European Urology Open Science Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1016/j.euros.2025.02.004
Marc Kidess , Troya Ivanova , Julian Hermans , Leo Stadelmeier , Marina Hoffmann , Nikolaos Pyrgidis , Julian Marcon , Michael Chaloupka , Ricarda M. Bauer , Christian G. Stief , Yannic Volz
{"title":"Next-generation Solutions: Are Patients Ready for Electronic Artificial Urinary Sphincters for Male Incontinence?","authors":"Marc Kidess ,&nbsp;Troya Ivanova ,&nbsp;Julian Hermans ,&nbsp;Leo Stadelmeier ,&nbsp;Marina Hoffmann ,&nbsp;Nikolaos Pyrgidis ,&nbsp;Julian Marcon ,&nbsp;Michael Chaloupka ,&nbsp;Ricarda M. Bauer ,&nbsp;Christian G. Stief ,&nbsp;Yannic Volz","doi":"10.1016/j.euros.2025.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>Urology is characterized by continuous innovation. The inception of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) marked a pivotal technological advance and further advances in digital treatment options for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) are emerging. Our aim was to assess patient willingness to receive an electronic artificial urinary sphincter (eAUS) implant and identify associated concerns.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients who received a first AUS implant (AMS800 system) for post-RP SUI from March 2013 to December 2023 were included. An anonymous survey was used to collect data on demographics, current AUS satisfaction, daily technology use, interest in an eAUS, and concerns about potential eAUS technical malfunctions. Data were analyzed using SPSS, with significance set at <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05.</div></div><div><h3>Key findings and limitations</h3><div>Out of 345 patients, 208 (60.2%) completed the questionnaire. The majority were aged 71–80 yr (51.7%) and had a university education (37.7%). Satisfaction with their AUS was high: 79.8% of the respondents were satisfied, 88.9% were satisfied with its handling, and 89.4% would choose an AUS implant again. Notably, 60.4% showed interest in an eAUS, with younger respondents and those who use technology on a daily basis expressing greater interest. Preferred control methods included remote-based (78.4%) and smartphone-based (60.0%) options. Concerns about system malfunction (66.4%), connection loss (65.9%), and battery issues (60.0%) were prevalent.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3><div>There was significant patient interest in an eAUS in our survey, especially among younger individuals and those who use technology daily. Despite high satisfaction with current AUS devices, addressing potential technical malfunctions and patient concerns is crucial for broader acceptance of an eAUS. Patient concerns about technological malfunctions seem to outweigh worries about medical issues.</div></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><div>Urology is becoming more advanced with technologies like robotic surgery and electronic artificial urinary sphincters (eAUS). According to our survey, most patients are happy with their current sphincters and are open to eAUS, especially younger patients who are familiar with technology. However, patients are concerned about system malfunctions and connection loss. More research is needed to address technical issues and patient concerns.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12254,"journal":{"name":"European Urology Open Science","volume":"74 ","pages":"Pages 21-27"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Urology Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666168325000631","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective

Urology is characterized by continuous innovation. The inception of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) marked a pivotal technological advance and further advances in digital treatment options for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) are emerging. Our aim was to assess patient willingness to receive an electronic artificial urinary sphincter (eAUS) implant and identify associated concerns.

Methods

Patients who received a first AUS implant (AMS800 system) for post-RP SUI from March 2013 to December 2023 were included. An anonymous survey was used to collect data on demographics, current AUS satisfaction, daily technology use, interest in an eAUS, and concerns about potential eAUS technical malfunctions. Data were analyzed using SPSS, with significance set at p < 0.05.

Key findings and limitations

Out of 345 patients, 208 (60.2%) completed the questionnaire. The majority were aged 71–80 yr (51.7%) and had a university education (37.7%). Satisfaction with their AUS was high: 79.8% of the respondents were satisfied, 88.9% were satisfied with its handling, and 89.4% would choose an AUS implant again. Notably, 60.4% showed interest in an eAUS, with younger respondents and those who use technology on a daily basis expressing greater interest. Preferred control methods included remote-based (78.4%) and smartphone-based (60.0%) options. Concerns about system malfunction (66.4%), connection loss (65.9%), and battery issues (60.0%) were prevalent.

Conclusions and clinical implications

There was significant patient interest in an eAUS in our survey, especially among younger individuals and those who use technology daily. Despite high satisfaction with current AUS devices, addressing potential technical malfunctions and patient concerns is crucial for broader acceptance of an eAUS. Patient concerns about technological malfunctions seem to outweigh worries about medical issues.

Patient summary

Urology is becoming more advanced with technologies like robotic surgery and electronic artificial urinary sphincters (eAUS). According to our survey, most patients are happy with their current sphincters and are open to eAUS, especially younger patients who are familiar with technology. However, patients are concerned about system malfunctions and connection loss. More research is needed to address technical issues and patient concerns.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Urology Open Science
European Urology Open Science UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
1183
审稿时长
49 days
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic Accuracy of Indocyanine Green–stained Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Nephrometry Scores Based on Three-dimensional Virtual Models Improve the Accuracy of Predicting Postoperative Complications After Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Results from a Collaborative ERUS Validation Study A Short Double-J Ureteral Stent Indwelling Time Is Safe and Effective Following Minimally Invasive Pyeloplasty: Long-term Results from a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Next-generation Solutions: Are Patients Ready for Electronic Artificial Urinary Sphincters for Male Incontinence? Bench Surgery with Robot-assisted Kidney Autotransplantation for Complex Kidney Tumors: Technique and Outcomes from a Single Center
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1