Sean P Elliott1, Rodrigo Villar, Burris Duncan. 1. Department of Pediatrics and Steele Memorial Children's Research Center, University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, 1501 North Campbell Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85724, USA. selliott@peds.arizona.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: We assessed how groups at spina bifida clinics evaluate and manage the urinary tract in patients with spina bifida, neurogenic bladder and bacteriuria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was mailed to all 169 clinics listed by the Spina Bifida Association of America. Survey items addressed baseline and surveillance evaluation, criteria used to assess urinary tract health and approaches to treatment in patients with spina bifida and neurogenic bladder. RESULTS: Of the 169 clinics personnel at 59 (35%) responded to the survey. Almost half of the respondents had an established protocol or standard of care. At most clinics the use of ultrasound (93%), voiding cystourethrograms (85%) and urodynamic testing (76%) was supported but not renal isotopic studies (14%) or excretory urograms (2%) for baseline evaluation. At all clinics ultrasound was supported for routine surveillance but there was no consensus for other imaging modalities. Assessment of clinic approaches to the evaluation and management of bacteriuria demonstrated variable results, although at most clinics fever, flank pain, dysuria, and changes in urinary pattern were identified as being consistent with true infection. Groups at clinics following their protocol or standard of care showed no significant differences in their approach compared to those at clinics lacking a protocol or standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: No consensus exists for the evaluation and management of bacteriuria in patients with spina bifida and neurogenic bladder at clinics specializing in the care of such patients, even at those with established standards of care. A clear need exists for an established, national set of evidence based guidelines to assist medical decision making in this high risk population and, thus, improve care.
PURPOSE: We assessed how groups at spina bifida clinics evaluate and manage the urinary tract in patients with spina bifida, neurogenic bladder and bacteriuria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was mailed to all 169 clinics listed by the Spina Bifida Association of America. Survey items addressed baseline and surveillance evaluation, criteria used to assess urinary tract health and approaches to treatment in patients with spina bifida and neurogenic bladder. RESULTS: Of the 169 clinics personnel at 59 (35%) responded to the survey. Almost half of the respondents had an established protocol or standard of care. At most clinics the use of ultrasound (93%), voiding cystourethrograms (85%) and urodynamic testing (76%) was supported but not renal isotopic studies (14%) or excretory urograms (2%) for baseline evaluation. At all clinics ultrasound was supported for routine surveillance but there was no consensus for other imaging modalities. Assessment of clinic approaches to the evaluation and management of bacteriuria demonstrated variable results, although at most clinics fever, flank pain, dysuria, and changes in urinary pattern were identified as being consistent with true infection. Groups at clinics following their protocol or standard of care showed no significant differences in their approach compared to those at clinics lacking a protocol or standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: No consensus exists for the evaluation and management of bacteriuria in patients with spina bifida and neurogenic bladder at clinics specializing in the care of such patients, even at those with established standards of care. A clear need exists for an established, national set of evidence based guidelines to assist medical decision making in this high risk population and, thus, improve care.
Authors: Bas S H J Zegers; Pauline L H Winkler-Seinstra; Cuno S P M Uiterwaal; Tom V P M de Jong; Jan L L Kimpen; Catharine C E de Jong-de Vos van Steenwijk Journal: Pediatr Nephrol Date: 2008-12-09 Impact factor: 3.714