Literature DB >> 15913717

Randomized comparison of vaginal and rectal measurement of intra-abdominal pressure during subtracted dual-channel cystometry.

Lucia M Dolan1, W Elizabeth Dixon, Karen Brown, Tracy Ord, Paul Hilton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the rectal (Prec) and vaginal (Pvag) measurement of intra-abdominal pressure during cystometry in women by assessment of patient acceptability and cystometrogram quality control.
METHODS: Of 136 consecutive women undergoing cystometrography, 100 were randomized to measurement of Prec or Pvag. The patients' experience was measured using visual analogue scales of anticipated and actual discomfort and embarrassment before and after the procedure. The setup time was recorded, and quality control was assessed by the number of catheter events (pressure lines falling out, requiring flushing, or repositioning), and quality of the cough signal.
RESULTS: A total of 136 consecutive patients were approached. Of those eligible, 50 were randomized to Prec and 50 to Pvag; 23 women declined randomization because of preference for a vaginal line. Overall, 81 line events occurred in 29 women with a vaginal line and 117 occurred in 34 women with a rectal line. No difference was found in patient acceptability nor in trace quality for the two routes. Despite catheter repositioning and flushing, only 13% of traces showed optimum trace quality throughout the entire investigation; the cough signal quality was worse after provocation, during voiding, and in women with prolapse.
CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients undergoing cystometry expressed a preference for the vaginal line. The quality of output from cystometry was limited by the conditions of the investigation rather than the method of intra-abdominal pressure measurement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15913717     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  7 in total

1.  Submaximal pelvic floor muscle contractions: similar bladder-neck elevation, longer duration, less intra-abdominal pressure.

Authors:  Baerbel Junginger; Hanna Vollhaber; Kaven Baessler
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Clinical evaluation of a wireless intra-vaginal pressure transducer.

Authors:  Yvonne Hsu; Tanner J Coleman; Robert W Hitchcock; Kristina Heintz; Janet M Shaw; Ingrid E Nygaard
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Effects of walking speeds and carrying techniques on intra-abdominal pressure in women.

Authors:  Tanner J Coleman; Nadia M Hamad; Janet M Shaw; Marlene J Egger; Yvonne Hsu; Robert Hitchcock; Huifeng Jin; Chan K Choi; Ingrid E Nygaard
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Intra-abdominal pressure during Pilates: unlikely to cause pelvic floor harm.

Authors:  Tanner J Coleman; Ingrid E Nygaard; Dannielle N Holder; Marlene J Egger; Robert Hitchcock
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Development and testing of a vaginal pressure sensor to measure intra-abdominal pressure in women.

Authors:  Evan M Rosenbluth; Paul J Johnson; Robert W Hitchcock; Ingrid E Nygaard
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.696

6.  Should women with incontinence and prolapse do abdominal curls?

Authors:  Sally Simpson; Michelle Deeble; Judith Thompson; Anne Andrews; Kathy Briffa
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 7.  Urodynamic studies for management of urinary incontinence in children and adults.

Authors:  Keiran David Clement; Marie Carmela M Lapitan; Muhammad Imran Omar; Cathryn M A Glazener
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-10-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.