ArticleTurkish journal of urology2020
Comparison of uroflowmetry tests performed with a sensation of normal desire to void versus urgency and correlation of test results with IPSS.
Article in Turkish journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the uroflowmetry test results performed for normal and urgent desire to void and their correlation with International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) values in adult male patients having lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) complaints. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this prospective study, a total of 83 patients were included. With a normal desire to void, maximum flowrate (Qmax)-normal, average flowrate (Qaverage)-normal, and void volume (VV)-normal values were obtained. Residual urine volume was examined by suprapubic ultrasound within 5 minutes following uroflowmetry, and calculated. The maximum bladder volume (MBV)-normal value was calculated by adding the residual-normal volume and VV-normal values. The same procedures were repeated the next day with the sensation of urgency, Qmax-urgency, Qaverage-urgency, VV-urgency, residue-urgency, MBV-urgency values were obtained.
resultsStatistically significant difference was determined for all parameters, and higher values were obtained in the urgency group for all parameters (p<0.05). A correlation analysis was performed for the Qmax-normal and Qmax-urgency values and the IPSS. Both parameters were not statistically significantly correlated with IPSS, but the correlation coefficient of Qmax-urgency was found to be higher than Qmax-normal (p=0.85, Correlation Coefficient=-0.022 for Qmax-normal and IPSS; and p=0.069, Correlation Coefficient=-0.214 for Qmax-urgency and IPSS, respectively).
conclusionOur study is the first study examining the effect of bladder sensitivity on uroflowmetry parameters in male patients having LUTS. More reliable results might be obtained in adult male patients with LUTS complaints when the uroflowmetry test is performed with a feeling of urgency to void. Our results need to be supported by more objective criteria, rather than subjective criteria such as IPSS.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.