PD11-08 PATIENT PERCEPTION OF PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL DISTRESS RELATED TO URODYNAMICS TESTING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN; A QUESTIONNAIRE-BASED STUDY AMONG MEN AND WOMEN WITH AND WITHOUT NEUROLOGIC CONDITIONS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Incontinence/Female Urology: Incontinence Evaluation1 Apr 2014PD11-08 PATIENT PERCEPTION OF PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL DISTRESS RELATED TO URODYNAMICS TESTING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN; A QUESTIONNAIRE-BASED STUDY AMONG MEN AND WOMEN WITH AND WITHOUT NEUROLOGIC CONDITIONS Anne M. Suskind, J. Quentin Clemens, John T. Stoffel, Ann Oldendorf, Bahaa S. Malaeb, Teresa Jandron, and Anne P. Cameron Anne M. SuskindAnne M. Suskind More articles by this author , J. Quentin ClemensJ. Quentin Clemens More articles by this author , John T. StoffelJohn T. Stoffel More articles by this author , Ann OldendorfAnn Oldendorf More articles by this author , Bahaa S. MalaebBahaa S. Malaeb More articles by this author , Teresa JandronTeresa Jandron More articles by this author , and Anne P. CameronAnne P. Cameron More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.541AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Urodynamic testing is an invasive procedure that can be associated with physical discomfort and emotional distress. The purpose of this study was to identify patients’ perceptions of this test according to gender and neurologic status. METHODS This is a questionnaire-based pilot study completed by patients immediately after undergoing urodynamic testing. Participants were asked questions pertaining to their perceptions of physical and emotional distress related to the study, their urologic and general health history, and their demographics. Results were stratified by gender and the presence of neurologic conditions. RESULTS A total of 108 patients completed the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (62.0%) felt that the exam was neither physically nor emotionally distressing, and 31.0% felt that the physical distress was worse than the emotional distress (Table). The worst part of the physical discomfort was the placement of the urethral catheter (36.8% in males, 35.1% in females). Pain associated with placement of the rectal catheter was low in both groups (7.9% in males and 3.9% in females). Results stratified by the presence of neurologic conditions followed a similar pattern; however, respondents with neurologic conditions reported no physical discomfort more often (40.7% compared to 29.7% in non-neurologic respondents). In terms of emotional distress, most respondents reported no emotional distress associated with the urodynamics study (51.5%), followed by anxiety (24.2%), embarrassment (16.2%), and not understanding what was happening (2.0%). Results were similar regardless of gender or the presence of a neurologic condition. CONCLUSIONS Urodynamic studies are well tolerated by men and women both with and without neurologic conditions. Patient perception of physical discomfort tended to be worse than that of emotional discomfort, with placement of the urethral catheter causing the most physical distress. Patient reported perceptions of physical and emotional distress stratified by gender and neurologic status. Results are presented as percentages. Overall (N=108) Male (N=39) Female (N=60) Non-Neuro (N=80) Neuro (N=28) WORST PART OF EXAM Physical discomfort 31.0 31.6 30.4 32.9 25.9 Emotional discomfort 5.0 5.3 5.4 4.1 7.4 Equally bad 2.0 2.6 1.8 1.4 3.7 Neither bad 62.0 60.5 62.5 61.6 63.0 PHYSICAL DISCOMFORT Placement of urethral catheter 35.6 36.8 35.1 39.2 25.9 No discomfort 32.7 31.6 31.6 29.7 40.7 Holding a full bladder 10.9 7.9 14.0 10.8 11.1 Urinating 6.9 2.6 10.5 6.8 7.4 Placement of catheter in rectum 5.0 7.9 3.5 5.4 3.7 Filling bladder with fluid 3.0 2.6 1.8 2.7 3.7 EMOTIONAL DISCOMFORT None 51.5 47.4 54.6 50.0 55.6 Anxiety 24.2 26.3 23.6 25.0 22.2 Embarrassment 16.2 18.4 14.6 16.7 14.8 Not understanding what was happening 2.0 2.6 3.6 2.8 7.4 Fear 2.0 2.6 1.8 2.8 -- © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e289 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Anne M. Suskind More articles by this author J. Quentin Clemens More articles by this author John T. Stoffel More articles by this author Ann Oldendorf More articles by this author Bahaa S. Malaeb More articles by this author Teresa Jandron More articles by this author Anne P. Cameron More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...