Dequirez Pierre-Luc, Schiro Jessica, Wojtanowski Anne, De Jonckheere Julien, Biardeau Xavier
University of Lille, Department of Urology, CHU Lille, Lille, France.
University of Lille, Inserm UMR-S1172 LilNCog, Lille Neuroscience and Cognition, Lille, France.
Neurourol Urodyn. 2025 Aug;44(6):1344-1350. doi: 10.1002/nau.70100. Epub 2025 Jun 29.
We aim to question patients' a priori opinion on recently developed digitalized and connected bladder diaries and ambulatory uroflowmeters.
All patients > 18 years old, presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and seen for a urology consultation at our center between May and December 2022, were proposed a standardized interview. An investigator explained the different types of devices and technologies ("paper" and "digitalized bladder diary", connected and non-connected "home" and "portable uroflowmeter", "sono-uroflowmeter" and "video-uroflowmeter") using a standardized presentation. Each device was then rated from 0 (very negative) to 5 (very positive) by patients for 5 subdomains: cumbersomeness, stigmatization, ease of use, confidentiality, and hygiene. Subgroup analyses including sex, age, activity, working conditions, presence of an underlying neurologic disease, and the type of LUTS, were carried out.
Seventy-seven patients participated in the study, including 51 female and 26 male patients. The highest median score was obtained by the "sono-uroflowmetry" (23/25) while the "video-uroflowmetry" got the lowest median score (9/25). When compared with "paper", the "digitalized bladder diary" was anticipated to be less cumbersome (p < 0.001) and was rated higher by patients < 50 years old (p = 0.011). When compared with "portable", "home uroflowmeters" were considered easier to use. The female sex was associated with a lower score for "portable uroflowmeters".
Most digitalized and connected bladder diaries and ambulatory uroflowmeters are viewed positively by patients, with a higher score for "sono-uroflowmetry". However, the anticipated preferences varied according to sex, age, and working conditions.
This study was not a clinical trial.
我们旨在询问患者对最近开发的数字化联网膀胱日记和便携式尿流计的先验看法。
2022年5月至12月期间，所有年龄大于18岁、出现下尿路症状（LUTS）并在我们中心接受泌尿外科咨询的患者均接受了标准化访谈。一名研究人员使用标准化演示文稿解释了不同类型的设备和技术（“纸质”和“数字化膀胱日记”、联网和未联网的“家用”和“便携式尿流计”、“超声尿流计”和“视频尿流计”）。然后，患者对每种设备在5个亚领域（笨重程度、耻辱感、易用性、保密性和卫生状况）从0分（非常负面）到5分（非常正面）进行评分。进行了包括性别、年龄、活动、工作条件、是否存在潜在神经疾病以及LUTS类型在内的亚组分析。
77名患者参与了该研究，其中包括51名女性患者和26名男性患者。“超声尿流测定法”获得了最高中位数评分（23/25），而“视频尿流测定法”获得了最低中位数评分（9/25）。与“纸质”相比，“数字化膀胱日记”预计笨重程度更低（p<0.001），且50岁以下患者对其评分更高（p=0.011）。与“便携式”相比，“家用尿流计”被认为更易于使用。女性对“便携式尿流计”的评分较低。
大多数数字化联网膀胱日记和便携式尿流计受到患者的积极评价，“超声尿流测定法”得分更高。然而，预期偏好因性别、年龄和工作条件而异。
本研究并非临床试验。
