Published: 2017-06-23

Patient-reported outcomes with medical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective study in a tertiary care teaching hospital of rural West Bengal, India

Soumitra Mandal, Ananya Mandal, Tapas K. Majhi, Sonai Mandal, Tanmoy Gangopadhyay, Asoke K. Das


Background: Effectiveness of pharmacotherapy in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is generally evaluated by clinical measures. Outcome of the treatment from the patient’s perspective however cannot be evaluated which may result communication gap between the patient and the physician. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) studies can bridge this gap. This study was undertaken to evaluate outcomes and to assess the impact of medical management of BPH on general health-related quality of life.

Methods: In this prospective, observational study, eligible patients with BPH attending a Urology clinic in a tertiary care rural hospital of West Bengal were enrolled and followed up on third and sixth months from baseline. Symptom assessment of BPH were assessed through International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS), BPH Impact Index (BII) and Health Related Quality of life questionnaires. Tools of descriptive statistics were used for analysis of data.

Results: In the study population of 66 patients, 50% were treated with monotherapy (alpha blockers) and 50% were treated with combinations (alpha blocker and 5alpha reductase inhibitors). After 6 months of medical management, I-PSS was decreased from 18.86±5.53 to 11.76±3.94 (p <0.001), BII score decreased from 9.65±2.59 to 5.89±2.24 (p <0.001) and VAS score increased from 51.44±10.03 to 54.24±11.38 (p <0.001).

Conclusions: We found medical management definitely improved quality of life in BPH patients and significantly decreased symptoms. This study is a step in the direction of development of larger and longer term PRO studies in BPH management.


Benign prostatic hyperplasia, BPH impact index, Health related quality of life, International prostate symptom score, Lower urinary tract symptoms, Patient reported outcome

Full Text:



American Urological Association. American Urological Association Guideline: Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) Revised. 2010. Available from: Accessed on 11th July 2016.

Acquadro C, Berzon R, Dubois D, Leidy NL, Marquis P, Revicki D et al. Incorporating the Patient’s Perspective into Drug Development and Communication: An Ad Hoc Task Force Report of the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Harmonization Group Meeting at the Food and Drug Administration, February 16, 2001. Value Health 2003;6:522-31.

Roehrborn CG. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: Etiology, pathophysiology, epidemiology, and natural history. In: Campbell–Walsh Urology. 10th Edition. Philadelphia. Elsevier; 2012:2570-2608.

Madersbacher S, Alivizatos G, Nordling J, Sanz CR, Emberton M, de la Rosette JJ. EAU 2004 guidelines on assessment, therapy and follow-up of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPH guidelines). Euro J of Uro. 2004;46:547-54.

Ikemoto I, Kiyota H, Suzuki Y, Oishi Y, Kishimoto K, Shimomura T, et al. Roles of BPH impact index in the evaluation of impaired urination in patients with BPH. The Japanese Journal of Urology. 2005;96:623-31.

Chevalier J, De Pourville G. Valuing EQ-5D using time trade-off in France. European Journal of Health Economics. 2013;14:57-66.

Fourcade RO, Lacoin F, Roupret M, Slama A, Fur CL, Michel E et al. Outcomes and general health-related quality of life among patients medically treated in general daily practice for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J of Uro. 2012;30:419-26.

Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research. 2011;20:1727-36.

Devlin NJ, Krabbe PFM. The development of new research methods for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L. European Journal of Health Economics. 2013;14(1):S1-3.

Dhingra N, Bhagwat D. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: An overview of existing treatment. Ind J of Pha. 2011;43:6-12.

Suzuki H, Yano M, Yusuke A, Nakatsu H, Egoshi KI, Mikami K et al. Clinical impact of tamsulosin on generic and symptom-specific quality of life for benign prostatic hyperplasia patients: Using international prostate symptom score and Rand Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Health Survey. Int J of Uro. 2006;13:1202-6.

Desgrandchamps F, Droupy S, Irani J, Saussine C, Comenducci A. Effect of dutasteride on the symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia, and patient quality of life and discomfort, in clinical practice. BJU International. 2006;98:83-8.

Wilt T, MacDonald R, Rutks I. Tamsulosin for benign prostatic hyperplasia (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;1:CD002081.

Wilt T, Howe RW, Rutks I, MacDonald R. Terazosin for benign prostatic hyperplasia (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;4:CD003851.

Roehrborn CG. The clinical benefits of dutasteride treatment for LUTS and BPH. Reviews in Urology. 2004;6:S22-30.

Debruyne F, Barkin J, Van Erps P, Reis M, Tammela TL, Roehrborn CG et al. Efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with the dual 5 alpha-reductase inhibitor dutasteride in men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. European Urology. 2004;46:488-95.

O’leary MP, Roehrborn CG, Andriole G, Nickel C, Boyle P, Höfner K. Improvements in benign prostatic hyperplasia-specific quality of life with dutasteride, the novel dual 5α- reductase inhibitor. BJU International. 2003;92:262-6.

Osman N, Chapple CR, Tamela TL, Eisenhardt A, Oelke M. Open-label, 9-month extension study investigating the uro-selective alpha-blocker silodosin in men with LUTS associated with BPH. World J of Uro. 2015;33:697-706.

Roehrborn CG, Siami P, Barkin J, Damião R, Walker MK, Nandy I et al. The effects of combination therapy with dutasteride and tamsulosin on clinical outcomes in men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from the Comb AT study. European Urology. 2010;57:123-31.