US patterns of care for urodynamic evaluation for BPH

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionPractice patterns around the use of urodynamic evaluation (UDS) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery are largely undefined. As such, we investigated factors associated with the use of UDS for BPH.MethodsWe used American Board of Urology case log data from 2008 to 2020, to compare patient‐ and surgeon‐sided factors associated with UDS utilization and BPH surgeries. We performed logistic regression models to identify factors independently associated with UDS usage for BPH.ResultsAmong urologists performing UDS, the majority (80%) self‐identified as general urologists and practiced in a private practice group (69%). Compared with urologists who performed no UDS, urologists who performed any UDS for BPH were more likely to be from the Mid‐Atlantic (20.3% vs. 10.6%, p < 0.01) and practice in regions with populations of >1 000 000 (34.7% vs. 28.5%, p < 0.01). Overall, UDS utilization declined over time (odds ratio [OR]: 0.95 year‐to‐year, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91–0.99). In adjusted analyses, the odds of performing UDS was higher among male (OR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.17–4.09), older (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.03–1.06), and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery subspecialty (OR: 3.23, 95% CI: 2.01–5.2) urologists. Additionally, performing UDS for BPH was associated with higher BPH surgical case volume (OR: 1.004, 95% CI: 1.001–1.008).ConclusionThere is a significant practice variation in use of UDS for BPH. Although overall BPH surgeries are increasing, urologists are increasingly less likely to perform UDS for BPH. Specifically, urologists who perform UDS have significantly higher BPH case volume than those who do not perform UDS, suggesting that UDS usage may not factor into BPH surgery decision‐making.