The Value of Urodynamics in an Academic Specialty Referral Practice

ObjectiveTo describe and evaluate the use of urodynamics (UDS) studies for all indications in an academic specialty referral urology practice.Materials and methodsThis is a prospective questionnaire-based study wherein clinicians completed a pre- and post-UDS questionnaire on each UDS that they ordered for all clinical indications between May 2013 and August 2014. Questions pertained to patient demographics and history, the clinical indication for the UDS, the clinician's pre- and post-UDS clinical impressions, and changes in post-UDS management plans. Pre- and post-UDS diagnoses were compared using the McNemar test.ResultsClinicians evaluated a total of 285 UDS studies during the study period. The average age of study participants was 56.0 (±16.4) years, 59.5% were female, and 29.3% had a neurologic diagnosis. The most common indication for performing UDS was to discern the predominant type of urinary incontinence (stress vs urgency) in patients with mixed incontinence symptoms (38.5%) and to assess the safety of the bladder during filling (38.2%). UDS statistically significantly changed the ordering clinician's clinical impression of the patient's lower urinary tract diagnosis for stress urinary incontinence and for urgency and urgency urinary incontinence (both had P values of <.05). Fluoroscopy was found to be helpful in 29.5% of urodynamic studies, and clinicians reported that UDS changed their treatment plans in 42.5% of the studies, most commonly pertaining to changes related to surgery (35.0%).ConclusionOverall, UDS was a clinically useful tool that altered the clinical impression and treatment plan in a large percentage of carefully selected patients

Patient Perceptions of Physical and Emotional Discomfort Related to Urodynamic Testing: A Questionnaire-based Study in Men and Women With and Without Neurologic Conditions

ObjectiveTo determine predictors of physical and emotional discomfort associated with urodynamic testing in men and women both with and without neurologic conditions.MethodsAn anonymous questionnaire-based study was completed by patients immediately after undergoing fluoroscopic urodynamic testing. Participants were asked questions pertaining to their perceptions of physical and emotional discomfort related to the study, their urologic and general health history, and demographics. Logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of physical and emotional discomfort.ResultsA total of 314 patients completed the questionnaire representing a response rate of 60%. Half of the respondents (50.7%) felt that the examination was neither physically nor emotionally uncomfortable, whereas 29.0% and 12.4% of respondents felt that the physical and emotional components of the examination were most uncomfortable, respectively. Placement of the urethral catheter was the most commonly reported component of physical discomfort (42.9%), whereas anxiety (27.7%) was the most commonly reported component of emotional discomfort. Presence of a neurologic problem (odds ratio, 0.273; 95% confidence interval, 0.121-0.617) and older age (odds ratio, 0.585; 95% confidence interval, 0.405-0.847) were factors associated with less physical discomfort. There were no significant predictors of emotional discomfort based on our model.ConclusionUrodynamic studies were well tolerated regardless of gender. Presence of a neurologic condition and older age were predictors of less physical discomfort. These findings are useful in counseling patients regarding what to expect when having urodynamic procedures

Patient Perceptions of Physical and Emotional Discomfort Related to Urodynamic Testing: A Questionnaire-based Study in Men and Women With and Without Neurologic Conditions

OBJECTIVES: To determine predictors of physical and emotional discomfort associated with urodynamic testing in men and women both with and without neurologic conditions. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire-based study completed by patients immediately after undergoing fluoroscopic urodynamic testing. Participants were asked questions pertaining to their perceptions of physical and emotional discomfort related to the study, their urologic and general health history, and demographics. Logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of physical and emotional discomfort. RESULTS: A total of 314 patients completed the questionnaire representing a response rate of 60%. Half of the respondents (50.7%) felt that the exam was neither physically nor emotionally uncomfortable, while 29.0% and 12.4% of respondents felt that the physical and emotional components of the exam were most uncomfortable, respectively. Placement of the urethral catheter was the most commonly reported component of physical discomfort (42.9%), while anxiety (27.7%) was the most commonly reported component of emotional discomfort. Having a neurologic problem (OR 0.273; 95% CI 0.121, 0.617) and older age (OR 0.585; 95% CI 0.405, 0.847) were factors associated with less physical discomfort. There were no significant predictors of emotional discomfort based on our model. CONCLUSIONS: Urodynamic studies were well tolerated regardless of gender. Having a neurologic condition and older age were predictors of less physical discomfort. These findings are useful in counseling patients regarding what to expect when having urodynamic procedures

Symptom Variability and Early Symptom Regression in the MAPP Study: A Prospective Study of Urological Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

PurposeWe examined symptom variability in men and women with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome. We describe symptom fluctuations as related to early symptom regression and its effect on estimated 1-year symptom change. We also describe a method to quantify patient specific symptom variability.Materials and methodsSymptoms were assessed biweekly in 424 subjects with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome during 1 year. To evaluate the impact of early symptom regression subjects were classified as improved, no change or worse according to the rate of change using 1) all data, 2) excluding week 0 and 3) excluding weeks 0 and 2. Patient specific, time varying variability was calculated at each interval using a sliding window approach. Patients were classified as high, medium or low variability at each time and ultimately as high or low variability overall based on the variability for the majority of contacts.ResultsPrior to excluding early weeks to adjust for early symptom regression 25% to 38% and 5% to 6% of patients were classified as improved and worse, respectively. After adjustment the percent of patients who were improved or worse ranged from 15% to 25% and 6% to 9%, respectively. High and low variability phenotypes were each identified in 25% to 30% of participants.ConclusionsPatients with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome show symptom variability. At study enrollment patients had worse symptoms on average, resulting in a regression effect that influenced the estimated proportion of those who were improved or worse. Prospective studies should include a run-in period to account for regression to the mean and other causes of early symptom regression. Further, symptom variability may be quantified and used to characterize longitudinal symptom profiles of urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Relationship between Chronic Nonurological Associated Somatic Syndromes and Symptom Severity in Urological Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndromes: Baseline Evaluation of the MAPP Study

PurposeWe used MAPP data to identify participants with urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes only or a chronic functional nonurological associated somatic syndrome in addition to urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes. We characterized these 2 subgroups and explored them using 3 criteria, including 1) MAPP eligibility criteria, 2) self-reported medical history or 3) RICE criteria.Materials and methodsSelf-reported cross-sectional data were collected on men and women with urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes, including predominant symptoms, symptom duration and severity, nonurological associated somatic syndrome symptoms and psychosocial factors.ResultsOf 424 participants with urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes 162 (38%) had a nonurological associated somatic syndrome, including irritable bowel syndrome in 93 (22%), fibromyalgia in 15 (4%), chronic fatigue syndrome in 13 (3%) and multiple syndromes in 41 (10%). Of 233 females 103 (44%) had a nonurological associated somatic syndrome compared to 59 of 191 males (31%) (p = 0.006). Participants with a nonurological associated somatic syndrome had more severe urological symptoms and more frequent depression and anxiety. Of 424 participants 228 (54%) met RICE criteria. Of 228 RICE positive participants 108 (47%) had a nonurological associated somatic syndrome compared to 54 of 203 RICE negative patients (28%) with a nonurological associated somatic syndrome (p < 0.001).ConclusionsNonurological associated somatic syndromes represent important clinical characteristics of urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes. Participants with a nonurological associated somatic syndrome have more severe symptoms, longer duration and higher rates of depression and anxiety. RICE positive patients are more likely to have a nonurological associated somatic syndrome and more severe symptoms. Because nonurological associated somatic syndromes are more common in women, future studies must account for this potential confounding factor in urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes