I

camoCscastaam

d

I

S

EBaefaigvttMrwfcRteEttIdaCtnidlirj

d

H

C

1

K

EBfMaa

rssTtRat‘mdrTcimoaCtcmts

d

IP

CA

1

T

EBnhtiiMhgrwmrttsRwsexperienced mild permanent urge incontinence, 1 of whom followingTURP.Conclusion: LBT using stranded seeds is a well tolerated treatment ofprostate cancer. NHT has no influence on complications following LBT.

doi:10.1016/j.jomh.2010.09.118

3

SMH Congress 2010 Abstracts

erns about possible impact of an increase in men’s services on women’snd children’s services, while the Inclusivists expressed concerned thaten’s health focusmay sidetrack themen’smovement form bigger issuesf concern to men.onclusion: Despite the absence of consensus, men do experience sub-tantial health problems and they need help which at the same timehallenges masculine values. Failure to proved adequate health resourcesnd absence of a ‘National Male Health Policy’(until 2010 in Australia), iseen by most study participants as a reinforcement of society’s messageo boys that males do not matter and that they are lesser beings. It is alsorgued that addressing men’s health issues will benefit not only men butlso women and society in general, since healthy men as major decisionakers contribute to a healthier society.

oi:10.1016/j.jomh.2010.09.115

ISMH World Congress 2010 Abstract 115SOLATION: THE INVISIBLE PROBLEM FOR MEN

. Karoski ∗

Welfare Studies, Sutherland College TAFE NSW, Sydney, Australia

-mail address: Spase.Karoski@det.nsw.edu.au.ackground: The central focus of this paper is to explore the perceptionsnd concerns that men in the men’s movement have regarding men’sxperience of isolation. I examine men’s experience of isolation fromour men’s movement strands: Profeminist, Mythopoetic, Fathers’ Rightsnd Inclusivists. Some of the key areas covered include men’s isolationn relationships, sexual isolation, isolation as a price of hegemony andender and isolation. I identify how the experience of isolation has moti-ated men to join the men’s movement, and introduce some approacheshe Australian men’s movement has adopted to assist men in breakingheir experience of isolation.ethods: The research is based on an extensive empirical ethnographicesearch, involving 45 in-depth, 2-3 hours long semi structured interviewsith prominent men in the diverse elements of the men’s movement, 11ocus group discussions, and participant observations atmen’s gatherings,onferences and men’s festivals in Australia.esults: Men in the men’s movement identified isolation and alienation ashe most important issues confronting men today, and that men’s appar-nt lack of emotional skills is amajor factor inmen experiencing isolation.ven though men from the different men’s movement strands perceivedhe causes and impacts of isolation differently, their views were not con-radictory butmore like jigsaw puzzle pieces, each part of a bigger picture.n general, the study found that men’s experience of isolation involvesetachment from their families, close associates, community, children,nd even themselves.onclusion: Isolation is one of the most critical issues confronting menoday and is a cost of men holding positions of social and economic domi-ance. But, isolation is not only a reflection of men’s personal pathology;t has structural causes as well. The socio-economic system has becomeependent onmen to carry out its core socio-economic functions, to workong hours, engage in combat or make economic rationalist decisions andt has a vested interest in keeping men’s emotions suppressed. The expe-ience of isolation and dehumanisation has been a key motivator for menoining the men’s movement.

oi:10.1016/j.jomh.2010.09.116

ISMH World Congress 2010 Abstract 116EALTH SCREENING IN MEN: MOTIVATORS AND BARRIERS

.J. Ng1,∗, E.M. Khoo1, W.Y. Low1, S.F. Tong2, L.P. Wong1, H.M. Tan3

University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2 Universiti KebangsaanMalaysia,uala Lumpur, Malaysia, 3 Sime Darby Medical Centre, Selangor, Malaysia

-mail address: ngcj@um.edu.my (C.J. Ng).

ackground: This study aimed to explore the motivators and barriers menaced when deciding whether or not to do health screening.ethods: This study used a qualitative approach to capture men’s views,ttitudes and experiences in health screening. Fifty-two married menbove 40 years of age fromSubang, an urban community inMalaysia, were

18 jmh Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 282–351, October 2010

ecruited. Six focus groupswere facilitated by trained interviewers using aemi-structured topic guide. The interviewswere audio-recorded and tran-cribed verbatim. The data were managed by using the NVivo software.he researchers extracted themes from the transcripts and categorisedhem into broader concepts.esults: Men had varied views about health screening; some considered itway to detect undiagnosed conditions while others viewed it as detec-ion of complications of an existing illness. Most did not know what aproper’ health screening entailed and would like professional recom-endations. The deciding factors for screening included: awareness of theisease; individual health status; time; financial status; job and insuranceequirement; and commitment to a commercial screening package.he main motivators for health screening were: recent personal healthrisis or family illness; responsibilities to their family; avoidance of med-cations; desire to continue enjoying life; and financial commitment. Theain barriers were: fear of ‘bad news’; need to change current lifestylence found to have an illness; cost; lack of knowledge about screening;nd lack of support from healthcare professionals.onclusion: Men had inadequate knowledge about health screening andhey sought help only when, rather than before, disease occurred. Health-are professionals and policy makers need to consider these barriers andotivators when planning health care for men. Effective public educa-

ion is needed to provide accurate and timely information about healthcreening.

oi:10.1016/j.jomh.2010.09.117

ISMH World Congress 2010 Abstract 117NFLUENCE OF NEOADJUVANT HORMONAL THERAPY ON COM-LICATIONS FOLLOWING BRACHYTHERAPY OF THE PROSTATE

atharina A.M. van Herpen1, Robert J.A.M. Davits1,∗, Nina Kupper2,ntoine Engelen3

TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, Tilburg, The Netherlands, 2 University of Tilburg, Tilburg,he Netherlands, 3 Instituut Verbeeten, Tilburg, The Netherlands

-mail address: rdavits@tsz.nl (R.J.A.M. Davits).ackground: Low dose brachytherapy (LBT) is an accepted multidiscipla-ary curative treatment of localized prostate carcinoma. Neoadjuvantormonal therapy (NHT) is frequently used to downsize the prostate,o prevent technical difficulties during implantation. We researched thenfluence of NHT on urological and gastrointestinal complications follow-ng LBT.ethods: In the years 2003-2008 300 patients underwent LBT in ourospital. We used 125I stranded seeds and a transperineal ultrasounduided implantation with real time planning. After implantation patientseceived a transurethral catheter for 24hours and an alpha-blocker. Weere able to collect reliable data from 239 patients: 30 patients had inter-ediate risk characteristics of their prostate carcinoma, 209 patients low

isk. Minimal follow-up was 1.5 year. 69 patients received NHT. We usedhe Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity score to describehe severity of urological and gastrointestinal complications and the Chiquare test to determine statistical significance.esults: We found no significant differences between the groups with andithout NHT preceding LBT. Lowest P-value is 0.37. In our hospital, noeverer complication than a grade 3 complicationwas reported. 3 patients