The effect of voiding position on uroflowmetry findings of patientswith Benign Prostatic Obstruction(BPO) in urology clinic HTAA

• Main Authors: Redzuan, Muhd Zaki Azre, Kamarulzaman, Mohd Nazli, Ghazali, Hamid
• Format: Article
• Language: English; English
• Published: John Wiley & Sons 2016
• Subjects: RD Surgery
• Online Access: http://irep.iium.edu.my/54054/8/54054-edited.pdf; http://irep.iium.edu.my/54054/14/54054_The%20effect%20of%20voiding%20position%20on%20uro%EF%AC%82owmetry_wos.pdf; http://irep.iium.edu.my/54054/; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bju.13662/epdf

Introduction: Changes in voiding positionmay have signi ficant impact on micturitiondue to factors such as changes in pressureof abdominal muscles and viscera, andrelaxation of pelvic floor muscles in differ-ent voiding positions. Few studies in the lit-erature have addressed the impact ofvoiding position on uroflowmetric results,however, the results were inconclusive.Objectives: To investigate the uroflowme-try findings of three different voiding posi-tions in BPO patients attending theUrology Clinic, HTAA.Materials and Methods: Cross-sectionalobservational study of BPO patientsattending the Urology Clinic HTAA fromMarch 2015 to December 2015.Uroflowmetry in standing, sitting andsquatting positions were done in those ful-filling the study criteria. The maximumflow rate, average flow rate, voiding vol-ume, total voiding time and post-voidingresidual volume were measured andrecorded. The results were then comparedand analysed. Other factors such as nor-mal voiding habit, number of medication,size of prostate, severity of BPO andintravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) werealso studied for any significance.Results: A total of 123 patients were stud-ied. Majority of patients were more than60 years old (87%) and more than halfwere Chinese (58.5%) followed by Malays(35%) and Indians (5.7%). The commonestvoiding positions among these patientswere standing (78%), sitting, 15 patients(12.2%) and squatting, 12 patients (9.8%).Average IPSS was 12 and majority of themwere in the moderate group (63.4%). Themean size of prostate in this study was42.95 grams. 33 patients had IPP (27.27%)while the rest (72.72%) did not have IPP