Abstract:
Background: Education has been associated with empowerment and better health
where pedagogies are aligned with life experiences. It, however, has had a number of
flaws that may make going to school less of a predictor of self-improvement. Limited
understanding of prostatism among both patients and healthcare workers leads to
suboptimal care and attendant complications. With no existing teaching protocol on
prostatism across the world, an objectively structured one was desirable. This study
developed and pretested a teaching protocol based on patient educational factors and
was found to be capable of empowering those taught to improve on their urological
health and care.
Objective: To develop and pretest a teaching protocol on prostatism based on patient
educational factors among men presenting at Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital,
Eldoret, Kenya.
Methods: This was a census study that lasted two years. A purposed consecutive
sampling was done and data collected using a pretested interviewer administered
questionnaire. The data was analyzed by use of SPSS version 20.0 by subjecting it to
cross-tabulation, correlations and linear regression analysis. Discrete data was
summarized using frequencies, proportions, ratios and percentages while continuous
data was by mean and standard deviations. Statistical significance using Chi square
and Student t- test was pegged at p value ≤0.05.
Results: One hundred and twenty-six patients were recruited into the study. Their
ages ranged from 51to 88years with mean± Standard Deviation of 67.1 ±9.7 years.
Those with no formal education were 46% while 55.9% of those who went to school
had less than or equal to 7years of primary education. Education beyond secondary
school positively correlated with better healthcare and yielded statistically significant
differences in terms of active search for health information (p <0.001), awareness of
prostatic disorders (p<0.001) and health status at presentation in hospital (p=0.003).
The patients taught using the teaching protocol scored 90% in good understanding of
the prostatic disorders, 96.7 % understanding of the symptoms and 100% sense of
being empowered to understand prostatism.
Conclusions: Formal education positively influenced healthcare in patients with
prostatism with maximum benefits in those with greater than secondary level of
education. The developed teaching protocol on prostatism will be able to empower
patients and enhance urological care.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the developed teaching protocol on
prostatism be incorporated into and widely utilised in patient health education so as to
better the urological health of patients.