Evaluating Urological Residents on Interpretation of Uroflowmetry Graphs

Authors

  • Muhammad Safdar Khan
  • A Mannan
  • R A Tasneem

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21649/akemu.v13i4.122

Abstract

Abstract: Object of this study was to assess whether patients should be given only the uroflowmetry graph and report (computer report) or final diagnosis and opinion. 17 urological residents (clinical experience > 3 y and urology experience > 6 months) were assessed by flowmetry reports and graphs of five patients. Subjects were kept blind that report and graph was of same patient. Of the 85 results correct diagnosis was made in 40% and 34% based on report and graph respectively. Qmax was considered in 98.8% of results. Other parameters were less frequently considered. On cross tabulation of report and graph the correct diagnosis was 27%. It can be concluded that interpretation of the uroflowmetry is not easy. Majority of the clinicians have difficulty in interpreting it. It is recommended that final diagnosis be given with the uroflowmetry graph.

Key words: uroflowmetry, Qmax, Urological residents.

How to Cite

Khan, M. S., Mannan, A., & Tasneem, R. A. (1). Evaluating Urological Residents on Interpretation of Uroflowmetry Graphs. Annals of King Edward Medical University, 13(4), 252. https://doi.org/10.21649/akemu.v13i4.122

Issue

Section

Articles