Insights from Rural and Non-Rural Penile Fracture Referrals - A Retrospective Review

Collaborating on impactful research is a significant part of my work in medical statistics. Recently, I co-authored a study titled "Time to Operation for Penile Fracture: A Retrospective Review of Rural Versus Non-Rural Referrals at a Tertiary Centre Over 10 Years" with Dr. Ben Buckland and his team. This study sheds light on the outcomes of penile fracture surgeries based on referral locations, offering valuable insights for urological care practices.

Introduction

Penile fracture is an urgent urological condition requiring prompt surgical intervention to optimise recovery. Our study aimed to examine the influence of referral locations (rural versus non-rural) on time to operation and subsequent outcomes for penile fracture patients over a decade at a tertiary Australian urology centre.

Key Findings

The study reviewed cases from January 2012 to January 2023, focusing on the time from injury to surgical repair and assessing postoperative recovery, particularly the return to pre-injury erectile function.

Main Results:

• Time to Operation: Rural patients had a longer mean time to operation (21.9 hours) than urban patients (13.6 hours).

• Postoperative Outcomes: Despite the delays, the return to pre-injury erectile function was not significantly different between rural and urban patients.

• Statistical Analysis: Logistic regression analysis indicated that factors such as distance from the hospital, rurality, and imaging did not statistically impact the operation's success.
  

Implications

The findings suggest that while timely surgical intervention is ideal, slight delays in penile fracture repairs, particularly within the observed timeframe, do not significantly compromise long-term outcomes. This is crucial information for managing patient care in rural settings, where logistical challenges often result in delays.

My Role

In this study, my role was pivotal in understanding the dataset, building explanatory notebooks, and creating visualisations to elucidate the findings. Here’s how I contributed:

1. Data Analysis: Collaborated on analysing patient data and identifying key trends and insights.

2. Explanatory Notebooks: Developed detailed notebooks to explain the statistical methods used, making the findings accessible to a broader audience.

3. Visualisations: Created visual aids to clearly present the study’s results, highlighting the differences and similarities in outcomes between rural and urban patients.

Conclusion

Our study highlights that while rural patients face longer wait times for surgical intervention; these delays do not necessarily affect their long-term recovery of erectile function. This reinforces the robustness of the recommended treatment approach for penile fractures, even when logistical challenges arise in rural settings.