DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20191654

Value of the visual prostate symptom score in evaluation of symptomatic benign prostatic enlargement: prospective study in a Nigerian population

Victor E. Onowa, Samaila I. Shuaibu, Idorenyin C. Akpayak, Chimaobi G. Ofoha, Christian A. Agbo, Lemech E. Nabasu, Zingkur Z. Galam, Venyir M. Ramyil, Nuhu K. Dakum

Abstract


Background: To evaluate the correlation of Visual Prostate Symptom Score (VPSS) with International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Maximum Urinary Flow (Qmax). To investigate the effect of educational level on the ability to independently complete the VPSS versus the IPSS and time taken to do so.

Methods: Bio data was taken from men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to Benign Prostatic Enlargement (BPE) who presented at the Urology clinic of Jos University Teaching Hospital. They were administered the IPSS questionnaire and VPSS pictogram, which they completed with or without physician assistance and the time taken to do so was noted. They subsequently had uroflowmetry done on same visit and the data was recorded in a structured proforma. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS(R) version 20. Correlation test was done for VPSS, IPSS and Qmax while the paired t-test was used for the average time spent in completing both questionnaires. A p-value <0.05 was considered as significant.

Results: Eighty-five men (aged 42 to 94 years) were enrolled in the study. The VPSS correlated significantly with the IPSS in terms of total score (r = +0.684, p<0.001) and QoL (r = +0.570, p<0.001), as well as with the Qmax (r = -0.222, p = 0.041). A greater proportion (21.2%) of men with limited education could complete the VPSS without physician assistance as compared to the IPSS (6.0%) and the average time taken to complete the VPSS (170.51 seconds) was significantly shorter than the time taken to complete the IPSS (406.42 seconds).

Conclusions: The VPSS correlates significantly with the IPSS and Qmax. It can be completed without physician assistance by a greater proportion of men with limited education within a shorter time period.


Keywords


Benign prostatic enlargement, International prostate symptom score, Lower urinary tract symptoms, Uroflowmetry, Visual prostate symptom score

Full Text:

PDF

References


Isaacs JT. Importance of the natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia in the evaluation of pharmacological intervention. Prostate. 1990;Suppl3:1-7.

Garraway WM, Kirby RS. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: effects on quality of life and impact on treatment decisions. Urology. 1994;44:629-36.

Mc Vary KT, Roehrborn CG, Avins AL, Barry MJ, Bruskewitz RC, Donnel RF, et al. Update on AUA Guideline on the management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. J Urol. 2011;185(5):1793-803.

Heyns CF, Van der Walt CL, Groeneveld AE. Correlation between a new visual prostate symptom score (VPSS) and uroflowmetry parameters in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. S Afr Med J. 2012;102(4):237-40.

Roehrborn CG. BPH progression: concept and key learning from MTOPS, ALTESS, COMBAT, and ALF-ONE. BJU Int. 2008;101:suppl 3:17-21.

Blaivas JG, Chancellor MB, Weiss J, Verhaaren M. Atlas of Urodynamics. 2nd ed. Blackwell Publishing; 2007:37-45.

Rodrigues Netto N Jr, de Lima ML, de Andrade EF, Apuzzo F, da Silva MB. Latin American study on patient acceptance of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in the evaluation of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 1997;49(1):46-9.

Cam K, Akman Y, Cicekci B, Senel F, Erol A. Mode of administration of international prostate symptom score in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: physician vs self. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2004;7(1):41-4.

MacDiarmid SA, Goodson TC, Holmes TM, Martin PR, Doyle RB. An assessment of the comprehension of the American Urological Association Symptom Index. J Urol. 1998;159:873-4.

Johnson TV, Abbasi A, Ehrlich SS, Kleris RS, Schoenberg ED, Owen-Smith A, et al. Patient misunderstanding of the individual questions of the American Urological Association Symptom Score. J Urol. 2008;179:2291-5.

Van der Walt CLE, Heyns CF, Groeneveld AE, Edlin RS, van Vuuren SPJ. Prospective comparison of a new visual prostate symptom score versus the international prostate symptom score in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 2011;78(1):17-20.

Abiola OO, Ajape AA, Adeniyi SO, Ayeni SC. Use and ease of self-administered International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) and Visual Prostate Symptoms Score (VPSS) questionnaires for the assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms in Nigerian men. Afr J Urol. 2016;22(2):121-6.

Heyns CF, Stellmacher GA, van der Merwe A. Evaluation of the visual prostate symptoms score in a male population with great language diversity and limited education: a study from Namibia. S Afr Med J. 2014;104(5):353-7.

Ogwuche EI, Dakum NK, Amu CO, Dung ED, Udeh E, Ramyil VM. Problems with administration of International Prostate Symptom Score in a developing community. Ann Afr Med. 2013;12(13):171-3.

MacDiarmid SA, Goodson TC, Holmes TM, Martin PR, Doyle RB. An assessment of the comprehension of the American Urological Association Symptoms Index. J Urol. 1998;159:873-4.

Wessels SG, Heyns CF. Prospective evaluation of a new visual prostate symptom score, the international prostate symptom score, and uroflowmetry in men with urethral stricture disease. Urology. 2014;83(1):220-4.

Afriansyah A, Yogi Gani I, Nusali H. Comparison between visualprostate symptoms score and international prostate symptoms scorein males older than 40 years in rural Indonesia. Prostate Int. 2014;2(4):176-81.

Golomb J, Lindner A, Siegel Y, Korczak D. Variability and circadian changes in home uroflowmetry in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia compared to normal controls. J Urol. 1992;147(4):1044-7.

Ushijima S, Ukimura O, Okihara K, Mizutani Y, Kawauchi A, Miki T. Visual analog scale questionnaire to assess quality of life specific to each symptom of the International Prostate Symptom Score. J Urol. 2006;176(2):665-71.