Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Jan;69(1):63-7; discussion 67-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.08.1118.

Process for development of multicenter urodynamic studies

Charles W Nager  1 , Michael E Albo, Mary P Fitzgerald, Susan M McDermott, Stephen Kraus, Holly E Richter, Philippe Zimmern; Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network
Affiliations

Process for development of multicenter urodynamic studies

Charles W Nager et al. Urology. 2007 Jan.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Vereecken RL. A critical view on the value of urodynamics in non-neurogenic incontinence in women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2000;11:188–95. - PubMed
    1. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:116–26. - PubMed
    1. Schafer W, delaRosette JJMCH, Hofner K, et al. The ICS-BPH study: pressure flow studies, quality control and initial analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 1994;13:491–2.
    1. Lewis P, Abrams P. Urodynamic protocol and central review of data for clinical trials in lower urinary tract dysfunction. BJU Int. 2000;85(Suppl 1):20–30. - PubMed
    1. Lewis P, Abrams P. Urodynamic interpretation; guidance not guessswork; 28th Annual Meeting of the International Continence Society; Jerusalem. 1998.