Are patients with hematuria appropriately referred to Urology? A multi-institutional questionnaire based survey

Alan M. Nieder, Yair Lotan, Geoffrey R. Nuss, Joshua P. Langston, Sachin Vyas, Murugesan Manoharan, Mark S. Soloway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

51 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Hematuria is a common finding that may be a sign of serious underlying urologic disease. Thus, the AUA guidelines (written in conjunction with the American Academy of Family Practice) recommend urologic evaluation for patients with both microscopic and gross hematuria. We sought to evaluate practice patterns of the evaluation of hematuria by primary care physicians (PCPs) in two locations in the United States. Methods: Anonymous questionnaires regarding use of urinalysis (UA) and evaluation of hematuria were mailed to 586 PCPs in Miami, Florida and 1,915 in Dallas, Texas. Surveys were mailed to physicians who identified themselves as practitioners of internal medicine, family practice, primary care, or obstetrics and gynecology. Results: Surveys were completed by 788 PCPs including 270 (46%) and 518 (26%) PCPs in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Screening UAs were obtained on all patients by 77% and 64%, of physicians in Miami and Dallas, respectively. In both Miami and Dallas, only 36% of PCPs reported referring patients with microscopic hematuria to an urologist. In patients with gross hematuria, referral rates were 77% and 69% in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Conclusions: While many PCPs use UA in many of their patients routinely, few PCPs automatically refer their patients with microscopic hematuria to urology and not all patients with gross hematuria are referred. Further investigations regarding why and when patients are referred to urology is warranted. Increasing awareness of the complete and timely evaluation of hematuria may be beneficial in preventing a delay in bladder cancer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)500-503
Number of pages4
JournalUrologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations
Volume28
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Urology
Hematuria
Primary Care Physicians
Urinalysis
Family Practice
Physicians
Urologic Diseases
Surveys and Questionnaires
Internal Medicine
Gynecology
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
Obstetrics
Primary Health Care
Referral and Consultation
Guidelines

Keywords

  • Bladder cancer
  • Hematuria
  • Screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Urology

Cite this

Are patients with hematuria appropriately referred to Urology? A multi-institutional questionnaire based survey. / Nieder, Alan M.; Lotan, Yair; Nuss, Geoffrey R.; Langston, Joshua P.; Vyas, Sachin; Manoharan, Murugesan; Soloway, Mark S.

In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, Vol. 28, No. 5, 09.2010, p. 500-503.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nieder, Alan M. ; Lotan, Yair ; Nuss, Geoffrey R. ; Langston, Joshua P. ; Vyas, Sachin ; Manoharan, Murugesan ; Soloway, Mark S. / Are patients with hematuria appropriately referred to Urology? A multi-institutional questionnaire based survey. In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2010 ; Vol. 28, No. 5. pp. 500-503.
@article{cf085baeaabf4f19a493e7de28b374d8,
title = "Are patients with hematuria appropriately referred to Urology? A multi-institutional questionnaire based survey",
abstract = "Introduction: Hematuria is a common finding that may be a sign of serious underlying urologic disease. Thus, the AUA guidelines (written in conjunction with the American Academy of Family Practice) recommend urologic evaluation for patients with both microscopic and gross hematuria. We sought to evaluate practice patterns of the evaluation of hematuria by primary care physicians (PCPs) in two locations in the United States. Methods: Anonymous questionnaires regarding use of urinalysis (UA) and evaluation of hematuria were mailed to 586 PCPs in Miami, Florida and 1,915 in Dallas, Texas. Surveys were mailed to physicians who identified themselves as practitioners of internal medicine, family practice, primary care, or obstetrics and gynecology. Results: Surveys were completed by 788 PCPs including 270 (46{\%}) and 518 (26{\%}) PCPs in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Screening UAs were obtained on all patients by 77{\%} and 64{\%}, of physicians in Miami and Dallas, respectively. In both Miami and Dallas, only 36{\%} of PCPs reported referring patients with microscopic hematuria to an urologist. In patients with gross hematuria, referral rates were 77{\%} and 69{\%} in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Conclusions: While many PCPs use UA in many of their patients routinely, few PCPs automatically refer their patients with microscopic hematuria to urology and not all patients with gross hematuria are referred. Further investigations regarding why and when patients are referred to urology is warranted. Increasing awareness of the complete and timely evaluation of hematuria may be beneficial in preventing a delay in bladder cancer.",
keywords = "Bladder cancer, Hematuria, Screening",
author = "Nieder, {Alan M.} and Yair Lotan and Nuss, {Geoffrey R.} and Langston, {Joshua P.} and Sachin Vyas and Murugesan Manoharan and Soloway, {Mark S.}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.10.018",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "500--503",
journal = "Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations",
issn = "1078-1439",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are patients with hematuria appropriately referred to Urology? A multi-institutional questionnaire based survey

AU - Nieder, Alan M.

AU - Lotan, Yair

AU - Nuss, Geoffrey R.

AU - Langston, Joshua P.

AU - Vyas, Sachin

AU - Manoharan, Murugesan

AU - Soloway, Mark S.

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - Introduction: Hematuria is a common finding that may be a sign of serious underlying urologic disease. Thus, the AUA guidelines (written in conjunction with the American Academy of Family Practice) recommend urologic evaluation for patients with both microscopic and gross hematuria. We sought to evaluate practice patterns of the evaluation of hematuria by primary care physicians (PCPs) in two locations in the United States. Methods: Anonymous questionnaires regarding use of urinalysis (UA) and evaluation of hematuria were mailed to 586 PCPs in Miami, Florida and 1,915 in Dallas, Texas. Surveys were mailed to physicians who identified themselves as practitioners of internal medicine, family practice, primary care, or obstetrics and gynecology. Results: Surveys were completed by 788 PCPs including 270 (46%) and 518 (26%) PCPs in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Screening UAs were obtained on all patients by 77% and 64%, of physicians in Miami and Dallas, respectively. In both Miami and Dallas, only 36% of PCPs reported referring patients with microscopic hematuria to an urologist. In patients with gross hematuria, referral rates were 77% and 69% in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Conclusions: While many PCPs use UA in many of their patients routinely, few PCPs automatically refer their patients with microscopic hematuria to urology and not all patients with gross hematuria are referred. Further investigations regarding why and when patients are referred to urology is warranted. Increasing awareness of the complete and timely evaluation of hematuria may be beneficial in preventing a delay in bladder cancer.

AB - Introduction: Hematuria is a common finding that may be a sign of serious underlying urologic disease. Thus, the AUA guidelines (written in conjunction with the American Academy of Family Practice) recommend urologic evaluation for patients with both microscopic and gross hematuria. We sought to evaluate practice patterns of the evaluation of hematuria by primary care physicians (PCPs) in two locations in the United States. Methods: Anonymous questionnaires regarding use of urinalysis (UA) and evaluation of hematuria were mailed to 586 PCPs in Miami, Florida and 1,915 in Dallas, Texas. Surveys were mailed to physicians who identified themselves as practitioners of internal medicine, family practice, primary care, or obstetrics and gynecology. Results: Surveys were completed by 788 PCPs including 270 (46%) and 518 (26%) PCPs in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Screening UAs were obtained on all patients by 77% and 64%, of physicians in Miami and Dallas, respectively. In both Miami and Dallas, only 36% of PCPs reported referring patients with microscopic hematuria to an urologist. In patients with gross hematuria, referral rates were 77% and 69% in Miami and Dallas, respectively. Conclusions: While many PCPs use UA in many of their patients routinely, few PCPs automatically refer their patients with microscopic hematuria to urology and not all patients with gross hematuria are referred. Further investigations regarding why and when patients are referred to urology is warranted. Increasing awareness of the complete and timely evaluation of hematuria may be beneficial in preventing a delay in bladder cancer.

KW - Bladder cancer

KW - Hematuria

KW - Screening

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77956293621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77956293621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.10.018

DO - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.10.018

M3 - Article

C2 - 19097811

AN - SCOPUS:77956293621

VL - 28

SP - 500

EP - 503

JO - Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

JF - Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

SN - 1078-1439

IS - 5

ER -