Validation of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital Prostate Symptoms Score (SGRHPSS), compared with the International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) in assessing lower urinary tract symptoms in the clinical setting

Aim: To validate Sir Ganga Ram Hospital Prostate Symptoms score (SGRHPSS), versus the International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) in assessing lower urinary tract symptoms in the clinical setting. Material & Methods: Male patients with age ≥ 45 years presented with lower urinary tract symptoms in OPD or admitted in wards were included. Female patients and male patients with age < 45 years were excluded. Sample size was calculated using the formula (Z²×p×q)/d²) and 560 cases of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were included. Each patient filled both IPSS and SGRH-PSS questionnaire. Each patient underwent ultrasound for prostate size, residual urine and uroflowmetry. Both scoring systems were compared, also with objective parameters of LUTS i.e., ultrasound findings for prostate size, post voided residual urine (PVRU) and uroflowmetry. Settings and Design: The study was conducted at department of Urology, Institute of Renal Sciences at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi. It was a prospective and comparative study. The study was conducted from July 2014 to March 2016. Statistical Analysis: We measured reliability of SGRHPSS using test-retest correlation coefficient 29 and Cronbach’s Alpha 29, 30 for internal consistency. All analysis was conducted using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 20 (SPSS 20) software. Results: Total IPSS score ranged from 2 to 34 with mean score of 18, while voiding LUTS ranged from 0 to 20 with mean score of 10.89 and storage LUTS ranged from 1 to 15 with mean score of 7.12. Total SGRHPSS score ranged from 1 to 8 with mean score of 5.79, while voiding LUTS ranged from 0 to 4 with mean score of 3.0 and storage LUTS ranged from 0 to 4 with mean score of 2.79. Spearman coefficient correlation in between total IPSS score and SGRHPSS score was 0.927 (P value &lt;0.001) and QoL in IPSS and SGRHPSS was 0.867 (P value &lt;0.001) suggest statistically significant and strong positive relationship. Conclusion: After analysing above observations and results, we concluded that SGRHPSS score system is shorter, efficient, friendlier, and less cumbersome for patients and clinicians and may potentially replace or compliment the IPSS.