|Authors||Richards KA, Ruiz VL, Murphy DR, Downs TM, Abel EJ, Jarrard DF, Singh H|
|Journal||Urol. Oncol. Volume: 36 Issue: 3 Pages: 88.e19-88.e25|
|Publish Date||2018 Mar|
To gain new insights into the origin and prevention of diagnostic delays in the evaluation of hematuria in an electronic health record (EHR)-based integrated care setting.We performed a retrospective review of 298 consecutive patients with new-onset hematuria at a Veterans Affairs facility from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013 excluding those where diagnostic evaluation was unnecessary (i.e., cystoscopy within 3 years prior). We collected data on presentation, such as red flags of painless gross hematuria (PGH) or asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) and subsequent evaluation (imaging, urologic referral, and cystoscopy). Delay was defined when evaluation was not completed within 60 days. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of delay.Of 201 patients, 149 had delays. PGH was present in 99 patients. These patients had a higher rate of urology referral within 1 year than patients with AMH (86.7% vs. 64.7%; P<0.01) and were more likely to undergo cystoscopy (75.8% vs. 52%; P<0.01). Delays occurred in 67% of PGH patients vs. 81% of AMH patients (OR 0.46; P = 0.02), and roughly a third were related to scheduling/coordination, patient-related issues, or delay in primary care referral. Bladder neoplasms were detected in 18% of patients with PGH and 2% of those with AMH.Delays in evaluation for hematuria occur commonly, regardless of strength of the red-flag. Many delays were preventable and could be targeted with interventions including EHR-based tracking systems or reformed scheduling practices.