Nygaard I E
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City 52242, USA.
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1996;7(2):74-6. doi: 10.1007/BF01902376.
This study aimed to test the recommendation in the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Practice Guideline on urinary incontinence that postvoid residual volume PVR estimates can be done by palpation. Postvoid residual volumes were obtained on 50 consecutive women presenting for evaluation of incontinence. Volumes were first estimated by bimanual examination and were then immediately measured by catheterization. Of 7 women who had a positive PVR, defined as greater than 50 ml, only 1 was estimated at greater than 50 ml on bimanual examination. The sensitivity of bimanual examination compared to catheterization to detect a positive PVR was 14%; specificity was 67%. Based on this assessment, the AHCPR guideline's inclusion of palpation estimates of PVR cannot be endorsed, unless a given practitioner has repeated a similar type of evaluation in his or her practice to determine whether the sensitivity is higher than that found in this study.
本研究旨在验证医疗保健政策与研究机构关于尿失禁的实践指南中的一项建议，即排尿后残余尿量（PVR）可通过触诊来估算。对50名因尿失禁前来评估的连续女性患者获取了排尿后残余尿量。首先通过双合诊检查估算尿量，然后立即通过导尿进行测量。在7名排尿后残余尿量为阳性（定义为大于50毫升）的女性中，双合诊检查时只有1名被估算为大于50毫升。与导尿相比，双合诊检查检测阳性排尿后残余尿量的敏感性为14%；特异性为67%。基于此评估，除非特定从业者在其实践中重复进行了类似类型的评估以确定敏感性是否高于本研究中的结果，否则医疗保健政策与研究机构指南中纳入的排尿后残余尿量触诊估算不能得到认可。
