Renal colic and urolithiasis practice patterns in Canada: a survey of Canadian Urological Association members.
BACKGROUND
We describe the practice variability of CUA (Canadian Urological Association) members and factors which predict these patterns for common stone scenarios.


METHODS
We asked 308 English- and 52 French-speaking CUA members to complete online surveys in their respective languages. We collected demographic information on fellowship training, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) access, academic setting and whether they are at a hospital with regionalized surgical services. Respondents indicated their actual as well as ideal treatment for scenarios of renal, proximal and distal ureteric calculi.


RESULTS
In total, 131 urologists responded (36% response rate), all of whom treated urolithiasis. Of this number, 17% had endourology fellowship training, 76% had access to SWL, 42% were at an academic institution and 66% were at institutions with regionalized surgical services. Actual and ideal treatment modalities selected for symptomatic, distal and proximal ureteric stones (4, 8, 14 mm) were consistent with published guidelines. There were discrepancies between the use of ureteroscopy and SWL in actual versus ideal scenarios. Actual and ideal practices were congruent for proximal ureteric stones and asymptomatic renal calculi. In multivariate analysis, respondents were less likely to perform ureteroscopy on proximal 4- and 8-mm stones if they were at a hospital with regionalized surgical services (OR: 0.097; 95% CI: 0.01-0.76, p = 0.03 and OR: 0.330; 95% CI: 0.13-0.83, p = 0.02).


CONCLUSIONS
There is clinical variability in the management of urolithiasis in Canada; however, management approaches fall within published guidelines. Type of hospital and access to operating room resources may affect treatment modality selection.
Division of Urology, St. Michael's Hospital, Keenan Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.
Raj
R
Satkunasivam
Melise
M
Keays
Kenneth T
KT
Pace