Patterns in the Diagnosis and Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in a Country that does not have Country-Specific Clinical Practice Guidelines

PURPOSE: We have evaluated the patterns of diagnostic and treatment practices for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a country that does not have country-specific clinical practice guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Probability samples were taken from the Korean Urological Association Registry of Physicians, and randomly sampled Korean urologists were asked to complete a questionnaire. The survey explored practice characteristics and attitudes, as well as diagnostic and treatment strategies, for the management of BPH. RESULTS: Of the 850 questionnaires sent, 302 were returned, and 277 of those were included in the final analysis (response rate 32.6%). For the initial evaluation, most urologists routinely used digital rectal examinations (DRE) and urinalysis. Uroflowmetry was used 34.7% of the time. Pressure-flow studies were rarely done. Symptom assessment was used in only 46.9% of cases. In addition, a significant number (58.8%) reported that treatment decisions were not based on the symptom questionnaire. Before surgery, almost all urologists routinely used DRE, urinalysis, and prostate-specific antigen tests. Of the respondents, 55.6% and 41.9% had prescribed alpha-blockers and alpha-blockers with 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, respectively. 81.2% of urologists perceived that selective alpha-blockers are different in terms of efficacy, and 82.7% felt that they differed in safety. Most respondents prescribed 5-alpha reductase inhibitors based on the prostate size. CONCLUSION: These data provide a picture of current practices regarding the management of BPH in Korea. The diagnostic and treatment practices for BPH do not follow published guidelines. Our findings ask the question "How influential are international guidelines, and do they really affect patient management in countries that do not have country-specific guidelines?"