Opportunity for ICS urodynamic standardization: Sensation, rectal contractions, and involuntary detrusor contractions

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives:The International Continence Society (ICS) has published essential documents standardizing urodynamic technique and reporting. Currently, no consensus exists regarding patient prompts for bladder sensation, particularly in the setting of impaired bladder sensation (e.g. spinal cord injury) (SCI). Similarly, no published standardization exists for the reporting of rectal contractions or duration and amplitude of involuntary detrusor contractions (IDCs). We evaluated current practice patterns among ICS urodynamicists regarding sensation prompts, mention of rectal contractions, and the extent to which involuntary detrusor contractions are described. Methods:A Qualtrics urodynamic testing survey was distributed via email to all ICS members twice over a 2 week period. The survey included 18 questions regarding provider and practice characteristics, urodynamic practice patterns, coaching prompts given to patients regarding sensation during urodynamic testing, and documentation of rectal and involuntary detrusor contractions (IDCs). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results:Of 2859 ICS members, 614 (21%) returned surveys. Of these, 35 did not perform urodynamic testing and 142 surveys were incomplete. Thus, 437/614 (71%) surveys were included in our analysis. Participants were most commonly fellowship-trained female functional urologists (40%) and practiced in a government service hospital (46.4%). Half of the providers (56%) are present for the study 100% of the time. Most participants instructed patients on how to report sensation during testing (57%). First Sensation (86%), First Desire (85%), Strong Desire (93%), and Urgency (86%) were the parameters most utilized. Various prompts for each of the UDS sensation parameters were reported including repeating ICS definitions and real-life analogies. 45% of respondents altered instructions for patients with impaired sensation (e.g. SCI), 59% commented on the presence or absence of rectal contraction, and 70% characterized the amplitude and duration of UICs in their reports. Conclusion:Although most survey participants report they standardize urodynamic instructions, there is no consensus for sensation prompts within ICS urodynamic practice publications. Urodynamic testing practice patterns vary widely among ICS urodynamicists with respect to sensation prompts, modified instructions for those with impaired sensation, and reporting of rectal contractions and UICs. Opportunity exists for further standardization of good urodynamic practice in published guidelines.