SCA practice case · Video consultation
“There was blood when I ejaculated — I’ve convinced myself it’s cancer”
Video consultation
Adult patient
Straightforward
Gender, reproductive & sexual healthNew & undifferentiated presentations
The candidate brief
This is what you would read in the 3-minute window before the patient connects. Read it once, note two or three hypotheses and one thing you must not miss, then stop.
Patient
Daniel Ofori · 33 years · male
Setting
Video consultation — blood in the ejaculate.
Past history
- Nil significant
Medication
- No regular medication
Allergies
NKDA
Recent notes
No previous consultations for urological or sexual health problems.
Reason for contact
Video consultation booked online: “personal problem, would prefer to discuss with the doctor”.
Practise this case
The full case is in the Hot Seat with the Gold plan. You get a 12-minute timer, a role-player script with facts released only when asked, examiner checkpoints by the three RCGP domains, a model consultation and the guidance behind it.
What this case tests
Show the learning points (spoiler: read after you have practised)
Haematospermia (blood in the ejaculate) is managed by AGE and red flags. In men UNDER 40 with a single or short episode and no red flags it is almost always BENIGN and self-limiting — commonly idiopathic, or due to inflammation/infection (prostatitis, urethritis, STI), recent instrumentation/prostate biopsy, vigorous sexual activity, or minor vessel bleeding — with cancer an uncommon cause, so strong, honest reassurance is appropriate after a sensible assessment. Take a targeted history (duration/recurrence, urinary symptoms, haematuria, STI risk/discharge, recent procedures, trauma, anticoagulants, fever, weight loss/bone pain), check BP (severe hypertension is associated), dip the urine/MSU, screen for STIs if indicated, and examine the external genitalia in person (a video consultation cannot do this), with DRE and PSA guided by age and findings (important in the older/persistent patient, more selective in a low-risk young man; PSA not within 48 hours of ejaculation or vigorous exercise, per the GOV.UK Prostate Cancer Risk Management Programme). Recognise the features that warrant INVESTIGATION/REFERRAL: age ≥40 (especially persistent or recurrent), associated visible/non-visible haematuria, an abnormal (hard/nodular) prostate, a raised age-adjusted PSA, or systemic red flags — these raise concern for PROSTATE cancer or other urological pathology, and NICE NG12 (Suspected cancer: recognition and referral, last updated April 2026) uses a suspected cancer pathway referral for a PSA above the age-specific range (40–49 above 2.5, 50–59 above 3.5, 60–69 above 4.5, 70–79 above 6.5 µg/L) or a malignant-feeling prostate, with separate routes for visible haematuria at 45+ (or non-visible at 60+ with dysuria or raised white cells) and for a testicular change. For the low-risk young man, treat any identified infection, give clear proportionate reassurance, and safety-net for persistence/recurrence, haematuria, urinary/systemic symptoms or reaching the age threshold. The communication core is the cancer FEAR fuelled by googling: acknowledge it, reassure honestly and proportionately (usually benign, rarely cancer in the young), and keep the threshold to investigate clear for the older/persistent/red-flag scenario — neither dismissive nor falsely alarming.
The guidance behind it
Similar SCA cases
gpreasoning.uk is not affiliated with or endorsed by the RCGP. Our cases are original teaching material written for practice; none is an exam recall. For anything official about the SCA, check the RCGP SCA pages.