Mp89-16 characteristics and motivations of men who seek vasectomy reversal

You have accessJournal of UrologyInfertility: Therapy I1 Apr 2017MP89-16 CHARACTERISTICS AND MOTIVATIONS OF MEN WHO SEEK VASECTOMY REVERSAL John Sigalos, Mark Hockenberry, Edgar Kirby, Jordan Krieger, Alexander Pastuszak, and Larry Lipshultz John SigalosJohn Sigalos More articles by this author , Mark HockenberryMark Hockenberry More articles by this author , Edgar KirbyEdgar Kirby More articles by this author , Jordan KriegerJordan Krieger More articles by this author , Alexander PastuszakAlexander Pastuszak More articles by this author , and Larry LipshultzLarry Lipshultz More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.2814AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Approximately 20% of men who undergo vasectomy subsequently consider reversal. However, the factors influencing the decision to undergo vasectomy reversal (VR) after vasectomy are poorly understood. Here we examine the characteristics and motivating factors of men who expressed preliminary interest in and subsequently elected to proceed or not to proceed with VR. METHODS Between February 2011 and October 2016, 252 men inquired about VR from a single andrology clinic through its website. These men were emailed an electronic survey assessing demographic information and motivations for VR. T-test of means and Chi-square test were used to analyze the data. RESULTS The survey was completed by 45 (17.8%) of the 252 men. The mean(SD) time since vasectomy was 9.8(7.7) years, and number of children was 2.2(1.1). One half (49%) of the respondents had undergone VR with an average of 9.7 years between vasectomy and VR. Table 1 compares factors associated with decision to proceed with VR after initial inquiry. Men with an annual income >$100,000 and with at least a college degree were more likely to undergo VR, while time since vasectomy, number of children, age of current partner, and having a new partner following vasectomy did not influence the decision to proceed. Reasons to forego VR included cost (48%), lack of interest in having children (26%), lack of time (9%), and lack of information about the procedure (9%). Most (74%) men who did not undergo VR plan to pursue VR in the future and reported that speaking to another patient (26%), a brochure (30%), and talking to a doctor (39%) would assist their decision making. CONCLUSIONS After initial interest in VR following vasectomy, men with high incomes and education are more likely to undergo VR. Financial burden was the most common reason preventing VR. Most men who did not undergo VR reported continued interest in VR and that receiving additional information would assist their decision making. © 2017FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 197Issue 4SApril 2017Page: e1208 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017MetricsAuthor Information John Sigalos More articles by this author Mark Hockenberry More articles by this author Edgar Kirby More articles by this author Jordan Krieger More articles by this author Alexander Pastuszak More articles by this author Larry Lipshultz More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...