Quality of life and patient satisfaction after artificial urinary sphincter
Background: We assessed satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) inmen with artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement.Methods: We identified 39 men who had AUS placement. Aretrospective chart review was conducted. Validated questionnaires,including the International Consultation on IncontinenceQuestionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), Post-Operative PatientGlobal Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), Incontinence ImpactQuestionnaire-Short Form (IIQ-SF), and Urogenital Distress Index(UDI-SF), were used to measure patient-reported outcome. Globalsatisfaction was also assessed.Results: At chart review, 34 of 39 questionnaires were assessedfor QOL, satisfaction and surgical outcome. Follow-up rangedfrom 7 to 60 months (median = 24 months). Surgical revisionswere required in 6 (17.6%) patients due to infection (1), erosion(1), combined infection and erosion (1), device failure (1) andsecond cuff placement (2). Quality of life was assessed using theIIQ-SF and UDI-SF, with mean scores of 15.4 and 24.8, respectively;these scores indicated a low negative impact on QOL. TheICIQ-SF mean score was 8.2, well below the worst possible score.The number of men using more than 1 pad per day dropped from27 preoperatively to 10 postoperatively. Most patients (31/34)described their urinary condition as better, 2 had no changeand 1 was worse. Most patients (31/34, 91.2%) would be willingto undergo the procedure again, 2 were undecided, and 1would not. Similarly, 28 patients (82.4%) would recommend theprocedure to a friend, 3 respondents would “with reservation,”1 respondent was undecided, and 2 would not recommend theAUS placement.Conclusion: Treatment of urinary incontinence with the AUS hasa positive effect on QOL with high patient satisfaction and reasonablylow complication rates.