Patient perception of videourodynamic testing

A questionnaire based study

Harriette M. Scarpero, Priya Padmanabhan, Xiaonan (Nan) Xue, Victor W. Nitti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We determined the degree of anxiety, embarrassment and discomfort anticipated by patients before undergoing videourodynamics and compared the results to the actual degrees experienced by patients. In addition, we compared these variables between men and women, and younger and older patients. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing urodynamics for the first time were given a 2 part questionnaire. Patients with neurological disease or those requiring an indwelling or intermittent catheter were excluded. Part 1 given immediately prior to the test contained 5 questions regarding expected anxiety, pain, embarrassment, apprehension regarding x-ray exposure and preparedness. Part 2 given immediately after testing contained 5 questions comparing anticipated to actual overall experience, pain and embarrassment, preparation and whether the patient would undergo testing again. Each question had a 5 point scale. Results: A total of 78 men and 88 women respondents completed the questionnaires. Most (greater than 95% per question) expected no to moderate anxiety, pain, embarrassment and apprehension. This did not vary with age, although more women anticipated greater embarrassment and more men expected little or no embarrassment (p <0.001). After testing most respondents (greater than 90% per question) thought that the test was the same or better than expected and it was associated with an expected or less than expected level of pain and embarrassment. This did not vary between the sexes but more younger individuals found that the test experience was worse than expected, while more older individuals found that it was better than expected. Of the patients 95% would undergo urodynamic testing again if medically indicated. Conclusions: Videourodynamics is well tolerated and is associated with only minimal to moderate degrees of anxiety, discomfort and embarrassment. A suspected lack of tolerance should not be a barrier to performing medically indicated urodynamic testing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)555-559
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume173
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Urodynamics
Anxiety
Pain
Surveys and Questionnaires
Catheters
X-Rays

Keywords

  • Anxiety
  • Questionnaires
  • Urinary tract
  • Urodynamics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Patient perception of videourodynamic testing : A questionnaire based study. / Scarpero, Harriette M.; Padmanabhan, Priya; Xue, Xiaonan (Nan); Nitti, Victor W.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 173, No. 2, 02.2005, p. 555-559.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Scarpero, Harriette M. ; Padmanabhan, Priya ; Xue, Xiaonan (Nan) ; Nitti, Victor W. / Patient perception of videourodynamic testing : A questionnaire based study. In: Journal of Urology. 2005 ; Vol. 173, No. 2. pp. 555-559.
@article{a18c5a25c8f84845b907838c25833aa5,
title = "Patient perception of videourodynamic testing: A questionnaire based study",
abstract = "Purpose: We determined the degree of anxiety, embarrassment and discomfort anticipated by patients before undergoing videourodynamics and compared the results to the actual degrees experienced by patients. In addition, we compared these variables between men and women, and younger and older patients. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing urodynamics for the first time were given a 2 part questionnaire. Patients with neurological disease or those requiring an indwelling or intermittent catheter were excluded. Part 1 given immediately prior to the test contained 5 questions regarding expected anxiety, pain, embarrassment, apprehension regarding x-ray exposure and preparedness. Part 2 given immediately after testing contained 5 questions comparing anticipated to actual overall experience, pain and embarrassment, preparation and whether the patient would undergo testing again. Each question had a 5 point scale. Results: A total of 78 men and 88 women respondents completed the questionnaires. Most (greater than 95{\%} per question) expected no to moderate anxiety, pain, embarrassment and apprehension. This did not vary with age, although more women anticipated greater embarrassment and more men expected little or no embarrassment (p <0.001). After testing most respondents (greater than 90{\%} per question) thought that the test was the same or better than expected and it was associated with an expected or less than expected level of pain and embarrassment. This did not vary between the sexes but more younger individuals found that the test experience was worse than expected, while more older individuals found that it was better than expected. Of the patients 95{\%} would undergo urodynamic testing again if medically indicated. Conclusions: Videourodynamics is well tolerated and is associated with only minimal to moderate degrees of anxiety, discomfort and embarrassment. A suspected lack of tolerance should not be a barrier to performing medically indicated urodynamic testing.",
keywords = "Anxiety, Questionnaires, Urinary tract, Urodynamics",
author = "Scarpero, {Harriette M.} and Priya Padmanabhan and Xue, {Xiaonan (Nan)} and Nitti, {Victor W.}",
year = "2005",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1097/01.ju.0000149968.60938.c0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "173",
pages = "555--559",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient perception of videourodynamic testing

T2 - A questionnaire based study

AU - Scarpero, Harriette M.

AU - Padmanabhan, Priya

AU - Xue, Xiaonan (Nan)

AU - Nitti, Victor W.

PY - 2005/2

Y1 - 2005/2

N2 - Purpose: We determined the degree of anxiety, embarrassment and discomfort anticipated by patients before undergoing videourodynamics and compared the results to the actual degrees experienced by patients. In addition, we compared these variables between men and women, and younger and older patients. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing urodynamics for the first time were given a 2 part questionnaire. Patients with neurological disease or those requiring an indwelling or intermittent catheter were excluded. Part 1 given immediately prior to the test contained 5 questions regarding expected anxiety, pain, embarrassment, apprehension regarding x-ray exposure and preparedness. Part 2 given immediately after testing contained 5 questions comparing anticipated to actual overall experience, pain and embarrassment, preparation and whether the patient would undergo testing again. Each question had a 5 point scale. Results: A total of 78 men and 88 women respondents completed the questionnaires. Most (greater than 95% per question) expected no to moderate anxiety, pain, embarrassment and apprehension. This did not vary with age, although more women anticipated greater embarrassment and more men expected little or no embarrassment (p <0.001). After testing most respondents (greater than 90% per question) thought that the test was the same or better than expected and it was associated with an expected or less than expected level of pain and embarrassment. This did not vary between the sexes but more younger individuals found that the test experience was worse than expected, while more older individuals found that it was better than expected. Of the patients 95% would undergo urodynamic testing again if medically indicated. Conclusions: Videourodynamics is well tolerated and is associated with only minimal to moderate degrees of anxiety, discomfort and embarrassment. A suspected lack of tolerance should not be a barrier to performing medically indicated urodynamic testing.

AB - Purpose: We determined the degree of anxiety, embarrassment and discomfort anticipated by patients before undergoing videourodynamics and compared the results to the actual degrees experienced by patients. In addition, we compared these variables between men and women, and younger and older patients. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing urodynamics for the first time were given a 2 part questionnaire. Patients with neurological disease or those requiring an indwelling or intermittent catheter were excluded. Part 1 given immediately prior to the test contained 5 questions regarding expected anxiety, pain, embarrassment, apprehension regarding x-ray exposure and preparedness. Part 2 given immediately after testing contained 5 questions comparing anticipated to actual overall experience, pain and embarrassment, preparation and whether the patient would undergo testing again. Each question had a 5 point scale. Results: A total of 78 men and 88 women respondents completed the questionnaires. Most (greater than 95% per question) expected no to moderate anxiety, pain, embarrassment and apprehension. This did not vary with age, although more women anticipated greater embarrassment and more men expected little or no embarrassment (p <0.001). After testing most respondents (greater than 90% per question) thought that the test was the same or better than expected and it was associated with an expected or less than expected level of pain and embarrassment. This did not vary between the sexes but more younger individuals found that the test experience was worse than expected, while more older individuals found that it was better than expected. Of the patients 95% would undergo urodynamic testing again if medically indicated. Conclusions: Videourodynamics is well tolerated and is associated with only minimal to moderate degrees of anxiety, discomfort and embarrassment. A suspected lack of tolerance should not be a barrier to performing medically indicated urodynamic testing.

KW - Anxiety

KW - Questionnaires

KW - Urinary tract

KW - Urodynamics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=12544252744&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=12544252744&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.ju.0000149968.60938.c0

DO - 10.1097/01.ju.0000149968.60938.c0

M3 - Article

VL - 173

SP - 555

EP - 559

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 2

ER -