...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BJU international >Quality control in urodynamics: a review of urodynamic traces from one centre.
【24h】

Quality control in urodynamics: a review of urodynamic traces from one centre.

机译：尿流动力学的质量控制：来自一个中心的尿流动力学痕迹的综述。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To investigate quality control in our unit and to enable other units to compare their results, as experience from central reviews of urodynamic traces for multicentre trials has suggested that poor quality control is common. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All consecutive male urodynamic tests conducted over 1 year were reviewed. A list of criteria to assess the quality of the records was devised, based upon International Continence Society guidelines on "good urodynamic practice", and on other sources. Eligible traces were analysed for aspects of quality control, e.g. baseline pressures and coughs to test pressure transmission. The data were analysed to establish how often quality criteria were met, and identify areas for improvement. RESULTS: In 100 eligible traces, the baseline detrusor pressure was 0-10 cmH2O in 86, and - 5 to +10 cmH2O in 94%. Baseline intravesical and abdominal pressure were 30-50 cmH2O in 68% and 73% of cases, respectively. Coughs were present before filling in 94%, during filling in 95%, before voiding in 72% and after voiding in 87% of cases. The cough-test frequency was sufficient in 30% of traces. In 11 the intravesical pressure line fell out during voiding. CONCLUSION: Most of the traces assessed met the quality criteria defined, but significant defects were not uncommon. Some of the problems identified suggest areas of urodynamic technique which should be studied in more detail. We intend to modify our quality control practices, and hope to show an improvement on re-audit. We hope that other urodynamic departments will be encouraged to review their practice, and we aim to improve our results.
机译：目的：为了调查我们单位的质量控制，并使其他单位能够比较他们的结果，因为对多中心试验进行尿动力学追踪的中央审查的经验表明，质量控制不佳是常见的。患者与方法：回顾了所有连续进行的超过1年的男性尿动力学检查。根据国际自律学会关于“良好尿动力学实践”的准则以及其他来源，设计了一系列评估记录质量的标准。对合格的痕迹进行了质量控制方面的分析，例如基线压力和咳嗽以测试压力传递。分析数据以确定满足质量标准的频率，并确定需要改进的地方。结果：在100条符合条件的痕迹中，基线逼尿肌压力在86中为0-10 cmH2O，在94％中为-5至+10 cmH2O。基线膀胱内压和腹压分别为68％和73％的患者30-50 cmH2O。在填满94％之前，填满95％期间，排空之前72％和排空后87％的病例中出现咳嗽。在30％的痕迹中，咳嗽测试的频率就足够了。 11时，排尿时膀胱内压力线脱落。结论：评估的大多数痕迹均符合定义的质量标准，但明显的缺陷并不少见。所发现的一些问题表明了尿动力学技术领域，应该对其进行更详细的研究。我们打算修改质量控制做法，并希望在重新审核方面有所改进。我们希望鼓励其他泌尿动力学部门对其实践进行审查，并致力于改善结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号