Evaluating Patients with Microscopic Hematuria
Author Information
Author(s): Clemens An, Jeong Jake, Chiu Cedrick, Gaston Evan, Kennedy Amanda, Sternberg Kevan
Primary Institution: The Robert Larner M.D. College of Medicine at the University of Vermont
Hypothesis
Can primary care providers effectively risk stratify and evaluate patients with microscopic hematuria according to established guidelines?
Conclusion
Many patients with microscopic hematuria are not receiving appropriate evaluations as per the guidelines, particularly high-risk patients.
Supporting Evidence
- 72.6% of patients had complete data for risk stratification.
- 58.4% of patients were classified as high-risk according to guidelines.
- Only 34.5% of patients were referred to urology for further evaluation.
- Only 6.7% of patients received guideline-concordant care.
Takeaway
Doctors need to check for blood in urine carefully, but many patients aren't getting the right follow-up care, especially those who are at higher risk.
Methodology
A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with microscopic hematuria in primary care settings was conducted, assessing risk stratification and diagnostic evaluations.
Potential Biases
Potential biases due to varying practices among primary care providers and urologists, as well as patient compliance issues.
Limitations
The study's retrospective design, missing data for risk stratification, and limited racial diversity among participants.
Participant Demographics
The cohort included 368 patients, with a median age of 62.5 years, predominantly white (94.4%), and 66% female.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website