McFall S, Yerkes A M, Bernard M, LeRud T
College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, USA.
Arch Fam Med. 1997 Mar-Apr;6(2):114-9. doi: 10.1001/archfami.6.2.114.
To determine practice patterns related to the evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence (UI).
Stratified random sample of physicians surveyed initially by mail with telephone follow-up.
Four counties in Central Oklahoma.
One hundred fifty-five physicians in 4 specialties: family practice, internal medicine, obstetrics/gynecology, and urology.
Self-reported evaluation and treatment of UI and training in treatment of UI. The overall rate of response was 80%.
Physicians miss opportunities to identify patients with UI. Despite substantial specialty variation, behavioral treatments and medications for UI, relative to the Agency for Health Care and Policy Research clinical guidelines, are underused. More than 40% of internists and family practitioners routinely recommended absorbent pads. Only 17% of physicians were aware of the clinical guidelines.
Physicians identified deficiencies in their level of preparation to evaluate and treat UI. Reports of practice patterns also suggest deficiencies.
确定与尿失禁（UI）评估和治疗相关的实践模式。
采用分层随机抽样，最初通过邮件对医生进行调查，并进行电话随访。
俄克拉荷马州中部的四个县。
来自四个专业的155名医生，分别为家庭医学、内科、妇产科和泌尿外科。
自我报告的尿失禁评估和治疗情况以及尿失禁治疗方面的培训。总体回复率为80%。
医生错过识别尿失禁患者的机会。尽管各专业存在很大差异，但相对于医疗保健政策研究机构的临床指南，尿失禁的行为治疗和药物治疗未得到充分利用。超过40%的内科医生和家庭医生常规推荐使用吸收性护垫。只有17%的医生知晓临床指南。
医生认识到自己在评估和治疗尿失禁方面的准备水平存在不足。实践模式报告也显示存在不足。
