Castillo Peter A, Espaillat-Rijo Luis M, Davila G Willy
Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL 33331, USA.
Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Mar;21(3):343-8. doi: 10.1007/s00192-009-1032-5. Epub 2010 Jan 6.
Much variability exists in outcome measures used to report success of SUI surgery. We set out to evaluate outcome measures and definitions of cure in SUI surgery studies.
Outcome measures, success rates, and definition of cure were analyzed from published series and compared to recommendations by leading authorities.
Ninety-one publications were analyzed. Thirty (33%) utilized solely subjective measures, four (4%) utilized only objective measures, and 57 (63%) included both. Sixty-one (67%) used symptom questionnaires, 56 (60%) QOL questionnaires, and six (7%) visual analog scale. Twelve (13%) used voiding diaries and 52 (56%) used self-reporting as an outcome measure. Objective measures: 52 (57%) cough stress test, 37 (41%) urodynamic evaluation, 28 (31%) pad testing and a combination in 33 (36%). Few studies adhered to one set of outcome recommendations.
Outcome measures used to evaluate success of anti-incontinence procedures lack consensus and comparability.
用于报告压力性尿失禁（SUI）手术成功率的结果指标存在很大差异。我们着手评估SUI手术研究中的结果指标和治愈的定义。
从已发表的系列研究中分析结果指标、成功率和治愈的定义，并与权威机构的建议进行比较。
分析了91篇出版物。30篇（33%）仅采用主观指标，4篇（4%）仅采用客观指标，57篇（63%）两者都有。61篇（67%）使用症状问卷，56篇（60%）使用生活质量问卷，6篇（7%）使用视觉模拟量表。12篇（13%）使用排尿日记，52篇（56%）使用自我报告作为结果指标。客观指标：52篇（57%）进行咳嗽压力试验，37篇（41%）进行尿动力学评估，28篇（31%）进行护垫试验，33篇（36%）采用综合指标。很少有研究遵循一套结果指标建议。
用于评估抗尿失禁手术成功率的结果指标缺乏共识和可比性。
