OBJECTIVES: To describe our experiences with a continuous quality improvement process for the standardization of multicenter urodynamic studies (UDSs) in a multi-institutional network. Multicenter UDSs can have considerable variations in testing procedures, training, equipment, and reviewer biases. METHODS: A quality control process was developed that included protocol development, certification of urodynamic testers, central review to assess compliance with protocol and quality, protocol modifications, standardization of equipment and signal configuration, development of an electronic signal repository, and the development of UDS Interpretation Guidelines. RESULTS: We describe our experience and process in the development and implementation of a standardized UDS protocol in a multicenter surgical trial for stress urinary incontinence. The process included our protocol development, quality control measures, standardization processes, electronic signal repository, and the need for UDS Interpretation Guidelines. A urodynamic testing procedures protocol was implemented successfully by 20 urodynamic testers at nine continence treatment centers. The protocol provides explicit and detailed guidelines for equipment, calibration, patient position, specific annotations, lay language bladder sensation parameters, visual leak point pressure techniques, modifications for prolapse, and data recording. A UDS Interpretation Guidelines document provides specific suggestions for validity and plausibility determination, expected ranges of urodynamic variables, and reasonable agreement of measuring systems. Both documents are available to urodynamic investigators on the Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network website (http://www.uitn.net/resourcesforphysicians.htm). CONCLUSIONS: Multicenter UDSs require a continuous quality improvement process and the development of UDS testing procedures and interpretation guidelines.
OBJECTIVES: To describe our experiences with a continuous quality improvement process for the standardization of multicenter urodynamic studies (UDSs) in a multi-institutional network. Multicenter UDSs can have considerable variations in testing procedures, training, equipment, and reviewer biases. METHODS: A quality control process was developed that included protocol development, certification of urodynamic testers, central review to assess compliance with protocol and quality, protocol modifications, standardization of equipment and signal configuration, development of an electronic signal repository, and the development of UDS Interpretation Guidelines. RESULTS: We describe our experience and process in the development and implementation of a standardized UDS protocol in a multicenter surgical trial for stress urinary incontinence. The process included our protocol development, quality control measures, standardization processes, electronic signal repository, and the need for UDS Interpretation Guidelines. A urodynamic testing procedures protocol was implemented successfully by 20 urodynamic testers at nine continence treatment centers. The protocol provides explicit and detailed guidelines for equipment, calibration, patient position, specific annotations, lay language bladder sensation parameters, visual leak point pressure techniques, modifications for prolapse, and data recording. A UDS Interpretation Guidelines document provides specific suggestions for validity and plausibility determination, expected ranges of urodynamic variables, and reasonable agreement of measuring systems. Both documents are available to urodynamic investigators on the Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network website (http://www.uitn.net/resourcesforphysicians.htm). CONCLUSIONS: Multicenter UDSs require a continuous quality improvement process and the development of UDS testing procedures and interpretation guidelines.
Authors: E van Waalwijk van Doorn; K Anders; V Khullar; S Kulseng-Hanssen; F Pesce; A Robertson; D Rosario; W Schäfer Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2000 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Werner Schäfer; Paul Abrams; Limin Liao; Anders Mattiasson; Francesco Pesce; Anders Spangberg; Arthur M Sterling; Norman R Zinner; Philip van Kerrebroeck Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Paul Abrams; Linda Cardozo; Magnus Fall; Derek Griffiths; Peter Rosier; Ulf Ulmsten; Philip van Kerrebroeck; Arne Victor; Alan Wein Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: T L Tammela; W Schäfer; D M Barrett; P Abrams; H Hedlund; H J Rollema; A Matos-Ferreira; J Nordling; R Bruskewitz; P Miller; R Kirby; J T Andersen; C Jacobsen; G J Gormley; M P Malice; M A Bach Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 1999 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Gary E Lemack; Stephen Krauss; Heather Litman; Mary Pat FitzGerald; Toby Chai; Charles Nager; Larry Sirls; Halina Zyczynski; Jan Baker; Keith Lloyd; W D Steers Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-09-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Toby C Chai; Liyuan Huang; Kim Kenton; Holly E Richter; Jan Baker; Stephen Kraus; Heather Litman Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2012-02-29 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Anna C Kirby; Charles W Nager; Heather J Litman; Mary P Fitzgerald; Stephen Kraus; Peggy Norton; Larry Sirls; Leslie Rickey; Tracey Wilson; Kimberly J Dandreo; Jonathan Shepherd; Philippe Zimmern Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2011-05-10 Impact factor: 2.696
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
Authors: Holly E Richter; Kimberly Kenton; Liyuan Huang; Ingrid Nygaard; Stephen Kraus; Emily Whitcomb; Toby C Chai; Gary Lemack; Larry Sirls; Kimberly J Dandreo; Anne Stoddard Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-12-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Charles W Nager; Linda Brubaker; Firouz Daneshgari; Heather J Litman; Kimberly J Dandreo; Larry Sirls; Gary E Lemack; Holly E Richter; Wendy Leng; Peggy Norton; Stephen R Kraus; Toby C Chai; Debuene Chang; Cindy L Amundsen; Anne M Stoddard; Sharon L Tennstedt Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2009-07-25 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Philippe Zimmern; Heather J Litman; Charles W Nager; Gary E Lemack; Holly E Richter; Larry Sirls; Stephen R Kraus; Gary Sutkin; Elizabeth R Mueller Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-02-08 Impact factor: 7.450