Scholarlink

Introduction and Hypothesis <p>The published urodynamic traces have been selected by their authors and subjected to peer review. The aims of the study were to describe quality control and print size of urodynamic traces published in scientific articles.</p> Methods <p>All articles published during 5&#xa0;years from four specialized journals were reviewed. Eighteen articles with filling cystometry and/or pressure-flow studies traces&#xa0;were selected for analysis. Urodynamic traces were classified according to the type of curve. The minimum acceptable print size was half the width of the page for filling cystometry and pressure-flow studies, and the full width of the page for filling cystometry + pressure-flow studies. Eleven items of the Bristol UTraQ scoring system were evaluated. Articles that explicitly stated that they had followed the ICS good urodynamic practices were recorded.</p> Results <p>Four items had less than 50% compliance: intravesical and abdominal pressures marked on the trace as being zeroed to atmosphere, good quality cough test done at the end of filling, before voiding, “permission to void” indicated on the trace and good quality cough test done after the final void. There were no statistical differences in the quality control scores between articles that did and did not explicitly state that they had followed ICS good urodynamic practices. Twenty-one out of 44 traces (47.7%) had a minimum acceptable print size.</p> Conclusion <p>Published urodynamic traces of these journals demonstrate imperfect quality control and have small print sizes. This generates the need to maintain vigorous strategies for disseminating and monitoring “good urodynamic practices.”</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Quality Control Audit of Urodynamic Traces Published in Scientific Articles

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月6日

查看全文
  • Juan Pablo Valdevenito,
  • Mauricio Olea,
  • Cristián Urrutia,
  • Alejandro Mercado-Campero,
  • Salvador Arlandis

摘要

Introduction and Hypothesis

The published urodynamic traces have been selected by their authors and subjected to peer review. The aims of the study were to describe quality control and print size of urodynamic traces published in scientific articles.

Methods

All articles published during 5 years from four specialized journals were reviewed. Eighteen articles with filling cystometry and/or pressure-flow studies traces were selected for analysis. Urodynamic traces were classified according to the type of curve. The minimum acceptable print size was half the width of the page for filling cystometry and pressure-flow studies, and the full width of the page for filling cystometry + pressure-flow studies. Eleven items of the Bristol UTraQ scoring system were evaluated. Articles that explicitly stated that they had followed the ICS good urodynamic practices were recorded.

Results

Four items had less than 50% compliance: intravesical and abdominal pressures marked on the trace as being zeroed to atmosphere, good quality cough test done at the end of filling, before voiding, “permission to void” indicated on the trace and good quality cough test done after the final void. There were no statistical differences in the quality control scores between articles that did and did not explicitly state that they had followed ICS good urodynamic practices. Twenty-one out of 44 traces (47.7%) had a minimum acceptable print size.

Conclusion

Published urodynamic traces of these journals demonstrate imperfect quality control and have small print sizes. This generates the need to maintain vigorous strategies for disseminating and monitoring “good urodynamic practices.”