Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-84882-034-0_20

Overview Of The Evaluation Of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction

C. Chapple, A. Mangera
Published 2011 · Medicine

Save to my Library
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
Share
The idea “the bladder is an unreliable witness” first came into existence with the recognition that lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were not disease or gender specific, could be reported inaccurately by the patient, or could be poorly documented by the investigator.1 In recent years, attempts have been made to quantify symptoms by the use of disease-specific symptom scores and quality of life measures. Well-known examples include the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) for suspected prostate and the King’s Health Questionnaire for incontinence-related problems. Currently, internationally acceptable questionnaires are being evaluated for incontinence.2
This paper references
Urodynamics Made Easy
C. Chapple (1990)
10.1097/00005650-199801000-00003
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research.
J. Eisenberg (1998)
10.1201/9780203904510
The Urinary Sphincter
J. Corcos (2001)
10.1016/J.EURURO.2006.02.018
A shifted paradigm for the further understanding, evaluation, and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men: focus on the bladder.
C. Chapple (2006)
10.1201/9780203904510.ch26
Voiding cystourethrography and magnetic resonance imaging of the lower urinary tract
G. Lemack (2001)
10.1016/S1569-9056(03)80118-5
Ambulatory urodynamic parameters in women with overactive bladder before and during treatment with tolterodine
Helen Bradshaw (2003)
10.1067/MOB.2001.108171
Which women with stress incontinence require urodynamic evaluation?
A. Weidner (2001)
10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02887.x
The clinical significance of the urodynamic investigation in incontinence
Y. Homma (2002)
10.1016/S1569-9056(04)90507-6
510 Assessment of reliability of 1-day, 3-day and 7-day frequency volume charts
S. Addla (2004)
10.1002/NAU.20549
Bladder control, urgency, and urge incontinence: Evidence from functional brain imaging
D. Griffiths (2008)
10.1016/0090-4295(88)90462-1
Pad-weighing test performed with standardized bladder volume.
G. Lose (1988)
10.1097/01.mou.0000172396.54643.96
An evidence-based approach to the evaluation and management of stress incontinence in women
Jason P. Gilleran (2005)
10.1002/NAU.1930080309
Pad‐weighing tests: A literature survey on test accuracy and reproducibility
B. Kromann-Andersen (1989)
10.1016/S0029-7844(03)00376-4
Mixed Urinary Incontinence Symptoms: Urodynamic Findings, Incontinence Severity, and Treatment Response
R. Bump (2003)
10.1111/j.1471-0528.1983.tb06764.x
Urethral pressure measurement by microtransducer: the results in symptom‐free women and in those with genuine stress incontinence
P. Hilton (1983)
10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01687.x
The cost‐effectiveness of preoperative testing (basic office assessment vs urodynamics) for stress urinary incontinence in women
A. Weber (2002)
10.1002/NAU.10052
The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: Report from the standardisation sub‐committee of the International Continence Society
P. Abrams (2002)
10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01015-9
Standing cystourethrogram: an outcome measure after anti-incontinence procedures and cystocele repair in women.
P. Showalter (2001)
10.1007/s001920200065
Valsalva Leak-Point Pressure Changes after Successful and Failed Suburethral Sling
S. Petrou (2002)
10.1002/NAU.10099
Overactive bladder symptoms: Do we need urodynamics?
G. A. Digesu (2003)
10.1007/s001920070020
Measurement of Postvoid Residual Urine with Portable Transabdominal Bladder Ultrasound Scanner and Urethral Catheterization
P. Goode (2000)



This paper is referenced by
10.3846/BIOMDLORE.2016.12
The use of DTW method as an effective way of uroflowmetry data screening analysis
W. Walendziuk (2016)
10.12915/PE.2014.07.13
Comparative research on the uroflowmetry system based on a weight transducer
W. Walendziuk (2014)
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar