Hallan R I, Marzouk D E, Waldron D J, Womack N R, Williams N S
Surgical Unit, London Hospital, UK.
Br J Surg. 1989 Sep;76(9):973-5. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800760934.
Anal sphincter function was assessed by digital examination and anal canal manometry in 66 patients and controls. Digital scores were allotted by using visual analogue scales for basal and squeeze sphincter function and were compared with the corresponding pressures. There were good correlations between digital basal score and maximum basal pressure (Spearman rank correlation coefficient rs = 0.56, P less than 0.001), and digital squeeze score and maximum squeeze pressure (rs = 0.72, P less than 0.001). There were wide ranges of sphincter function on digital and manometric assessment with considerable overlap between patient groups. Digital scores detected differences in sphincter function between patient groups as accurately as manometry. The sensitivities and specificities of digital scores and anal canal manometry in segregating continent and incontinent patients were similar. It was concluded that digital estimation was equally as good as assessment of anal sphincter function as anal canal manometry.
通过指诊和肛管测压法对66例患者及对照者的肛门括约肌功能进行了评估。使用视觉模拟量表对基础和收缩时的括约肌功能进行指诊评分，并与相应压力进行比较。指诊基础评分与最大基础压力之间存在良好的相关性（Spearman等级相关系数rs = 0.56，P < 0.001），指诊收缩评分与最大收缩压力之间也存在良好的相关性（rs = 0.72，P < 0.001）。在指诊和测压评估中，括约肌功能范围广泛，患者组之间有相当大的重叠。指诊评分在检测患者组之间的括约肌功能差异方面与测压法一样准确。指诊评分和肛管测压法在区分大便失禁和大便控制正常的患者方面的敏感性和特异性相似。得出的结论是，指诊评估与肛管测压法在评估肛门括约肌功能方面同样有效。
