Dr. Anjali Kapoor

There was a abstract presented by someone from Beaumont talking about how earlier intervention with minimally invasive therapies

is less cost utilization compared to later intervention, which they had defined as less than 12 months or greater than 12 months.

What are your thoughts on early intervention, given what you've seen in practice with your patients and also kind of this cost piece layered onto it?

Yeah, I think that abstract was really just another game changer in terms of bolstering the 2024 guidelines to really...

make the point that we can offer these interventions earlier if they're appropriate for the patient and the patient wants to opt for them.

Again, going along the lines of that shared decision making.

And really, the goal here is as a community of urogynecologists, we've come a long way in terms of being able to offer these therapies and get people relief much sooner than, say, seven years of them being cycled on meds.

It's kind of the fight against insurance and

you know, getting these therapies that are very effective, really justified with insurance companies uncovered.

Yeah.

Maybe I learned it from you.

I use the same wording I always tell people.

So I give them that menu of options.

I think there's even a SUFU handout that's patient-facing that talks about the lifestyle modifications or behavioral changes, medication, and then all those minimally invasive therapies.

And I kind of give them this and I say, we can start anywhere.

And if lifestyle or medication is what you choose to pursue first, don't get discouraged if it doesn't work.

We have plenty of other options we can go through.

Yeah, it's definitely tough, although there's millions of people with it.

Getting them to a point where they feel some sort of improvement or relief in their quality of life with any of these therapies is tough.

And as we know, it takes years.