title: Identification of patients requiring out-patient follow-up after transurethral prostatectomy: is there a role for nurse-led screening of post-operative outcomes by telephone?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine the most efficient method to follow patients after transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) such that only those patients suffering significant post-operative problems are reviewed.
  
  
  METHODS
  The study comprised two parts: (1) a retrospective review of the case notes of 100 consecutive patients who underwent TURP under one consultant to determine whether any factors could be identified pre- or post-operatively by which those patients most likely to require clinic review could be selected and; (2) a prospective review of the succeeding 100 patients undergoing TURP, using a telephone 'screening' call made by the urological research nurse 3 months after the operation. Patients who requested follow-up and those patients with malignancy or admitted in high-pressure chronic retention were reviewed in the out-patient department.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the first part, 17 patients (17%) required an out-patient review for malignancy. Only nine patients (11%) with benign histology required further treatment after TURP; this subgroup could not be identified on the basis of their pre- or post-operative symptoms. In the second part, 23 patients were not reviewed by telephone; 14 had carcinoma of the prostate, eight had no telephone and one could not be contacted after seven attempts. Of the remaining 77 contacted by phone, 61 (79%) declined further clinic review and 16 (21%) requested follow-up for persistent problems. A mean of two calls was made per patient and the mean duration of each call was 6.3 min.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Based on pre- or post-operative symptoms at the time of discharge, there is no reliable method of identifying those patients who have a poor result after TURP. Telephone screening of patients at 3 months identified successfully those patients who required an out-patient review and enabled resources to be targeted towards this difficult group of patients.
authors.affiliation: Manchester Royal Infirmary, UK.
authors.forename: R J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Brough
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Pidd
authors.forename: K J
authors.initials: KJ
authors.lastname: O'Flynn
authors.forename: S R
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Payne
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000553:Ambulatory Care; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011182:Postoperative Care / Q000451:nursing; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000379:methods / Q000451:nursing*; D011470:Prostatic Hyperplasia / Q000451:nursing* / Q000601:surgery; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013689:Telephone; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D016055:Urinary Retention / Q000451:nursing / Q000601:surgery