Analysis of Organization of Dispensary Observation of Patients with Urolithiasis


dispensary observation

How to Cite

Solomchak, D. B. (2015). Analysis of Organization of Dispensary Observation of Patients with Urolithiasis. Galician Medical Journal, 22(1), 124-129. Retrieved from


282 medical charts (p. № 030 / o) of patients with urolithiasis were assessed. The patients were under dispensary control of urologists in ambulatory departments of healthcare institutions in Ivano-Frankivsk region. It has been found that the existing regulatory and legal framework for medical and technological standards of medical care in case of urolithiasis (2004, 2007) doesn’t correspond to modern requirements and doesn’t contain distinct requirements to the terms and scope of outpatient observation. Organizational disadvantages regarding timeliness of detection and ensuring of patients with appropriate treatment and observation were identified while analyzing the structure by age, sex, place of residence, ways of registration and medical supervision of patients with urolithiasis under outpatient control.

When the basic requirements of dispensary observation were not maintained (incomplete coverage of urologist control examinations – 54.0%, laboratory tests – 47.6% and ultrasound examinations – 39.8%), the low level of surgical treatment in  patients with urolithiasis (51.1%) led to its insufficient efficiency and social and economic losses. Many people had been registered more than ten years (18.8%), a high percentage of clinical patients had abandoned forms of urolithiasis (15%), frequent complications (12.4%) and recurrences (11.8%), required expensive inpatient treatment (0.4 hospitalizations per year per one dispensary patient) and became disabled in the working age (5%).




Borzhiievskyi A.Ts. Current algorithms of treatment of patients with urolithiasis. Urolohiia. 2005; 2:39-42.

Borzhiievskyi A.Ts. Ureterolitiaz: (urological aspects). Lviv. “Vysokyi Zamok”. 2007; 263.

Borisov V.V., Dzeranov N.K. Urolithiasis. Therapy of patients with kidney and ureters stones. Moscow. 2011; 88.

Vozianov A.F., Pasiechnikov S.P., Saidakova N.O., Dmytryshyn S.P. Dynamics of morbidity and prevalence of urolithiasis in the adult population of Ukraine. Zdorovie muzhchiny. 2010; 2(33): 17-24.

Dzeranov N.K., Lopatkin N.A. Urolithiasis. Clinical recommendations. Moscow. “Overlay”. 2007; 296.

Yermolenko T.I., Zhulay T.S. Pharmacoeconomical evaluation of conservative therapy of urolithiasis using a new home drug “Flarosuktsyn”. Klinichna farmatsiia. 2011; 3: 17-20.

Tyktynskyy O.P., Aleksandrov V.P. Urolithiasis. St. Petersburg. 2000; 384.

Shekar Kumaran M.G., Pralhad S. Patki Evaluation of Ayurvedic drugs (Tsyston) in urolithiasis: double blind, placebo-controlled study. Zdorovie muzhchiny. 2013; 1 (44): 82-86.

Yanenko E.K., Merinov D.S., Konstantinova O.V. [et al.] Current trends in the epidemiology, diagnostics and treatment of urolithiasis. Eksperimentalnaya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2012; 3: 19-24.

Coe FL, Evan A., Worcester E. Kidney stone disease. The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2005; 115(10): 2598–2608.

Hesse A., Tiselius HG., Siener R., Hoppe B. Urinary Stones. Diagnosis, treatment, and Prevention of Recurrence. 3rd revised and enlarged edition 2009; 232.

Indridason O.S., Birgisson S., Edvardsson V.O. et al. Epidemiology of kidney stones in Iceland: a population – based study. Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. 2009; 3: 215-220.

Knoll T. Epidemiology, Pathogenesis and Pathophysiology of Urolithiasis. European Urology Supplements. 2010; 9: 802-806.

Türk C., Knoll T., Petrik A. et al. EAU Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Association of Urology. 2011: 1-104.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.