Introduction Clinic based uroflowmetry is commonly used in the diagnosis and management of lower urinary tract symptoms. AUA (American Urological Association) guidelines recommend 2 separate uroflowmetry tests with a voided volume greater than 150 ml for accurate interpretation. We characterized the interpretability of a series of uroflowmetry tests done at our institution and hypothesized that a significant number were noninterpretable because of inadequate urine volume. Methods Uroflowmetry results were collected from male patients at the UH (University of Utah Hospital) and VAMC (George Wahlen Veterans Affairs Medical Center) urology clinics between August 31, 2014 and September 30, 2014. Average time to perform uroflowmetry was determined. Tests with a volume of 150 ml or less were classified as noninterpretable. Data were characterized using descriptive statistics. Results During the study period 169 tests were collected, including 104 at UH and 65 at VAMC, of which 107 (63%) were noninterpretable. An estimated total of 1,452 tests were performed at UH and VAMC within a 12-month period. Average time to perform uroflowmetry by health care workers was 2 minutes 18 seconds. The estimated time loss per year for medical personnel due to noninterpretable uroflow studies was 35 hours. Conclusions More than 50% of clinic based uroflowmetry tests at our institution had a voided volume of 150 ml or less and were deemed noninterpretable per AUA guidelines. Current clinic based uroflowmetry testing strategies are inefficient and wasteful. Reliable, accurate alternatives to clinic based uroflowmetry for the diagnosis and management of lower urinary tract symptoms should be explored.
- cost-benefit analysis
- healthcare failure mode and effect analysis
- lower urinary tract symptoms
- monitoring, ambulatory
ASJC Scopus subject areas