Consumerism and its impact on robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

BJU International

Volumn 108, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1874-1878

  Alkhateeb, Sultan ^a   Lawrentschuk, Nathan ^b  

^a KING FAHAD NATIONAL GUARD HOSPITAL   (Saudi Arabia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

computer assisted surgery; Internet; laparoscopy; marketing; patient education; prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONSUMER; CONTROLLED STUDY; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNET; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MARKETING; MASS MEDIUM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

ADVERTISING AS TOPIC; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MARKETING OF HEALTH SERVICES; MASS MEDIA; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; ROBOTICS; SEARCH ENGINE;

EID: 81255185494     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10117.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Binder J, Kramer W,. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001; 87: 408-10 (Pubitemid 32240857)
2. Ficarra V, Novara G, Fracalanza S, et al,. A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int 2009; 104: 534-9
3. Box GN, Ahlering TE,. Robotic radical prostatectomy: long-term outcomes. Curr Opin Urol 2008; 18: 173-9 (Pubitemid 351317386)
4. Menon M, Tewari A,. Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy Team. Robotic radical prostatectomy and the Vattikuti urology institute technique: an interim analysis of results and technical points. Urology 2003; 61 (Suppl. 1): 15-20 (Pubitemid 36349125)
5. Cadeddu JA, Gautam G, Shalhav AL,. Robotic prostatectomy. J Urol 2010; 183: 858-61
6. Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, et al,. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2009; 302: 1557-64
7. Blute ML,. Radical prostatectomy by open or laparoscopic/robotic techniques: an issue of surgical device or surgical expertise? J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 2248-9
8. Wirth MP, Hakenberg OW,. Surgery and marketing: comparing different methods of radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1031-3
9. Scardino PT,. Intoxicated by technology: are we keeping our eyes on the prize? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2007; 4: 231 (Pubitemid 46745477)
10. Herrell SD, Smith JA Jr,. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? Urology 2005; 66: 105-7 (Pubitemid 41356567)
11. Ekman A, Hall P, Litton JE,. Can we trust cancer information on the Internet? A comparison of interactive cancer risk sites. Cancer Causes Control 2005; 16: 765-72 (Pubitemid 41110968)
12. Huang GJ, Penson DF,. Internet health resources and the cancer patient. Cancer Invest 2008; 26: 202-7 (Pubitemid 351225465)
13. Lawrentschuk N, Abouassaly R, Hackett N, et al,. Health information quality on the internet in urological oncology: a multilingual longitudinal evaluation. Urology 2009; 74: 1058-63
14. Mulhall JP, Rojaz-Cruz C, Muller A,. An analysis of sexual health information of radical prostatectomy websites. BJU Int 2010; 105: 68-72
15. McPherson CJ, Higginson IJ, Hearn J,. Effective methods of giving information in cancer: a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials. J Public Health Med 2001; 23: 227-34 (Pubitemid 32895891)
16. Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Sun L, et al,. Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 785-93
17. Burns E,. Almost 12 billion U.S. searches conducted in July. Available at: [accessed April 2010].
18. Sullivan D,. Nielsen Net ratings search engine ratings. Available at: [accessed April 2010].
19. Eysenbach G, Kohler C,. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002; 324: 573-7 (Pubitemid 34214337)
20. Google Inc. Available at:. Accessed April 2010
21. Gaudinat A, Grabar N, Boyer C,. Machine learning approach for automatic quality criteria detection of health web pages. Stud Health Technol Inform 2007; 129: 705-9
22. United States General Accounting Office. FDA oversight of direct-to-consumer advertising has limitations. Report to congressional requesters GAO-03-177. October 2002. Accessed April 2010
23. Murphy DG, Bjartell A, Ficarra V, et al,. Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 735-920
24. Eastham JA,. Robotic-assisted prostatectomy: is there truth in advertising? Eur Urol 2008; 54: 720-2
25. Tseng TY, Cancel QV, Fesperman SF, et al,. The role of early adopter bias for new technologies in robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol 2007; 177: 1318
26. Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA, et al,. Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology 2008; 71: 597-601 (Pubitemid 351442985)
27. Murphy WM,. Media hype in the medical literature: what's a doctor to do? J Urol 2000; 163: 916-8 (Pubitemid 30091654)
28. Bolenz C, Gupta A, Hotze T, et al,. Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 453-8
29. Wentz DK, Jackson MJ, Raichle L, Davis D,. Forces for change in the landscape of CME, CPD, and health systems-linked education. In, Davis D, Barnes BE, eds. The Continuing Professional Development of Physicians: From Research to Practice, 1st edn. Chapt 2.Chicago, IL: AMA Press, 2003: 27-9