Abstract
Aim
Urodynamic studies (UDS) are physiological measurements of voiding and storage function of the lower urinary tract that are commonly performed in clinical practice to investigate bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms. Despite considerable efforts to improve UDS, standardisation of the practice remains to be challenging. This audit thus, presents a review the current UDS referral process and analysis of the clinical details included on urodynamic requests.
Method
This audit included retrospective data from 112 patients between March and Oct 2020, 98 of which had UDS performed. Patient electronic records, referral forms and clinic letters were all used for data collection.
Results
Data shows that 47% of patients were females with average age of 56 years, range (16-86) years. The reason of UDS was clearly stated in 8 referrals only and the clinical examination findings were clearly mentioned in 31% only. More than three quarters of patients (i.e., 77%) had assessment of post void residual prior to UDS, but half of the proportion had no history of relevant medications. In 98 patients who had UDS done, the main findings showed that 4 patients had normal studies, 3 with dysfunctional voiding, 7 had bladder outflow obstruction, 32 patients were diagnosed with detrusor overactivity, 12 had stress incontinence and 7 showed detrusor underactivity.
Conclusions
Finding of this audit clearly suggest a level of unclarity in the great majority of referrals. Evidently, key history of relevant medication is overlooked in half of the referrals. Improvements to the current pathway to UDS is therefore pivotal.
646 A Review of The Urodynamic Referral Pathway and The Accuracy of Urodynamic Study Requests
