ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE To validate a new simplified score for the assessment of men with LUTS (LUTS-V).
METHODS We made adjustments to the VPSS, resulting in a new simplified instrument (LUTS visual score – LUTS-V). In a pilot study, LUTS-V was administered to 50 men to identify interpretation issues. We used the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) as the gold standard to validate the new tool in 306 men. The total IPSS and LUTS-V scores for each subject were evaluated and we used Bland-Altman analysis and Pearson’s correlation plot to assess the agreement between the scores. A ROC curve was utilized to determine the diagnostic accuracy of LUTS-V and its diagnostic properties were described in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values.
RESULTS Median age was 59 [52-67] years and, according to the IPSS, 26 (8.7%) patients had severe symptoms, while 99 (33%) had moderate symptoms, and 175 (58.3%) had mild symptoms. We found a positive correlation between the IPSS and LUTS-V (r = 0.72; p < 0.0001). Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement between the two questionnaires. We found LUTS-V to have a diagnostic accuracy to detect more severe cases of 83% (95% CI: [78-87%]; p < 0.001), as estimated by the area under the ROC curve. The cut-off value of ≥ 4 points was the best threshold, with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 78%, which resulted in a negative predictive value of 81% and a positive predictive value of 71% in this scenario. Median completion time was 0.51 [0.41-1.07] min for LUTS-V and 2.5 [2.2-3.4] min for the IPSS (p < 0.0001). In addition, 91.5% of patients completed the questionnaires with no help, while the other 8.5% were interviewed.
CONCLUSION LUTS-V is a simple, self-administered tool with a significant discriminating power to identify patients with moderate to severe symptoms.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The database is under the care of the senior author and will be published online. currently, the website of our research group is being improved. We believe that it will be updated in 40 days
