Patient navigation for overactive bladder improves access to care
- 42 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
Patients with overactive bladder (OAB) become discouraged with medication therapy because of the side effects, minimal subjective improvement and costs of therapy. With the implementation of a patient navigation pathway there is increased communication, subsequently leading to increased patient retention rates and utilization of third-line therapies.
This was a quality improvement study carried out over a 17-month period comparing utilization of a navigation pathway versus patients without navigation. The data were obtained using an online database (PPS Analytics) to compare medication use, cystoscopy, urodynamic studies, use of third-line therapy, and return visits.
A total of 535 patients were included in the analysis and broken down into two respective groups. Group 1 were those placed on the navigation pathway and able to be reached via telephone (n = 431). Group 2 were those started on the navigation pathway who were not able to be reached via telephone, but were chart reviewed by a navigator (n = 104). Third-line therapy usage for groups 1 and 2 was 24% and 11% respectively. Return visits for additional OAB management for groups 1 and 2 were found to be 71% and 50% respectively.
Patient retention levels and utilization of third-line therapies are significantly improved when utilizing a navigation pathway. With 24% of the patients included in this study opting for third-line therapy, this represents a 600% increase in third-line therapies over national averages.
KeywordsOveractive bladder Patient navigation Care pathway
American Urological Association
Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery
Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine & Urogenital Reconstruction
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest in the publication of this article.
- 2.Stewart W, Herzog R, Wein A, et al. The prevalence and impact of overactive bladder in the U.S.: results from the NOBLE program. Neurourol Urodyn. 2001;20:406–8.Google Scholar
- 8.Hartigan S, Fischer K, Wein A, Jaffe W. High attrition rate and low progression to advanced therapy for patients with overactive bladder: a hospital system wide study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(Suppl 1):S576–7.Google Scholar
- 9.Lloyd J, Guzman J, Giusto L, et al. Trends in third line therapy utilization for overactive bladder amongst general urologists, advanced practice providers, and FPMRS subspecialists. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(Suppl 1):S584.Google Scholar
- 12.Serrell EC, Hansen M, Mills G, et al. Prostate cancer navigation: initial experience and association with time to care. World J Urol 2018. 2019;37(6):1095–1101.Google Scholar
- 16.Schabert VF, Bavendam T, Goldberg EL, Trocio JN, Brubaker L. Challenges for managing overactive bladder and guidance for patient support. Am J Manag Care. 200915 (4 Suppl):S118–22.Google Scholar