Quality of life of patients treated for kidney stones 10-20mm in diameter in terms of the type of operation performed: A qualitative study

Introduction: Urolithiasis is a common chronic disease whose effect on patients' quality of life (QOL) is considerable but depends on the treatment received, differing between types of surgery. Intrarenal stones can be treated with different techniques: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), and mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), with proportional success and complication rates. The aim of this study was to qualitatively explore the impact of the different techniques on patients' QOL and understand their experiences of treatment choices.

Methods: Patients treated for medium-sized kidney stones (10-20mm in diameter) were interviewed in a semi-structured manner. The interview data were transcribed and analyzed by theme according to consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines.

Results: Data saturation was achieved after interviewing 15 patients. The mean interview time was 34min (standard deviation (SD), 6.8min). The mean patient age was 54 years (SD, 9.5 years). Eight patients underwent ESWL, 10 were treated with fURS, and 8 underwent mini-PCNL. Twenty-seven subthemes were coded and regrouped into eight major themes, namely: no sense of choice in the decision-making process for eleven patients; extremely negative experiences of double-J stents for fourteen patients; concern about the risk of recurrence or treatment failure for thirteen patients; complicated hygiene and dietary recommendations for nine patients; technique-dependent postoperative outcomes; relatively well-tolerated operations for thirteen patients; a poor experience of sick leave, often because of a double-J stent; different views regarding future operations. In fact, a third of patients would choose the most effective treatment, a third would choose the simplest procedure and the last third would trust their urologist. Patients' experiences of these operations are variable.

Conclusion: Urologists must support their patients by presenting the different treatment options with clear, appropriate, and unbiased information. This should ensure patients take part in treatment decisions as part of a personalized treatment plan.