How can we maximize the diagnostic utility of uroflow? ICI-RS 2017

Andrew Gammie*, Peter Rosier, Rui Li, Chris Harding

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    2 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Aims: To gauge the current level of diagnostic utility of uroflowmetry and to suggest areas needing research to improve this. Methods: A summary of the debate held at the 2017 meeting of the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society, with subsequent analysis by the authors. Results: Limited diagnostic sensitivity and specificity exist for maximum flow rates, multiple uroflow measurements, and flow-volume nomograms. There is a lack of clarity in flow rate curve shape description and uroflow time measurement. Conclusions: There is a need for research to combine uroflowmetry with other non-invasive indicators. Better standardizations of test technique, flow-volume nomograms, uroflow shape descriptions, and time measurements are required.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)S20-S24
    JournalNeurourology and Urodynamics
    Volume37
    Early online date9 Jan 2018
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2018

    Keywords

    • non-invasive
    • uroflowmetry

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'How can we maximize the diagnostic utility of uroflow? ICI-RS 2017'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this