Correlation of Digital Rectal Examination and Anorectal Manometry with Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Women with Fecal Incontinence.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Alayne Markland, Mary Ackenbom, Uduak Andy, Ben Carper, Eric Jelovsek, Douglas Luchristt, Shawn Menefee, Rebecca Rogers, Vivian Sung, Donna Mazloomdoost, Maria Gantz
{"title":"Correlation of Digital Rectal Examination and Anorectal Manometry with Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Women with Fecal Incontinence.","authors":"Alayne Markland, Mary Ackenbom, Uduak Andy, Ben Carper, Eric Jelovsek, Douglas Luchristt, Shawn Menefee, Rebecca Rogers, Vivian Sung, Donna Mazloomdoost, Maria Gantz","doi":"10.1007/s00192-024-05848-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Standardized digital rectal examination (DRE) correlates with anorectal manometry (ARM) measures. However, less is known about the relationship between DRE/ARM measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), especially among women with fecal incontinence (FI). Our aims were to evaluate associations between DRE and ARM measures and compare PROs with diagnostic evaluation measures for women with FI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed data from the parent clinical trial, Controlling Anal incontinence by Performing Anal exercises with Biofeedback or Loperamide (CAPABLe). We pooled data from randomized women who completed standardized ARM, DRE, and validated PROs at baseline and 12 and 24 weeks post-treatment initiation. PROs included FI severity, impact on quality of life, and bowel diary data. We analyzed ARM pressure and volume data and DRE using the Digital Rectal Examination Scoring System (DRESS) resting and squeeze mean scores. We used Spearman Rank Correlation to measure associations between the ARM measures and mean DRESS scores, and between PROs and ARM/DRESS scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 291 randomized women with ARM and DRE data, the correlation between DRESS and ARM resting measures was 0.196 (p<0.001) and between squeeze measures was 0.247 (p<0.001). At most timepoints, PROs more consistently correlated with squeeze ARM pressures and squeeze DRESS scores than resting measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found weak correlations between ARM and DRE measures and between those measures and PROs. Although DRE and ARM are commonly used diagnostic measures among women with FI, the weak correlations with patient-reported symptoms raises questions about their utility in clinical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05848-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Standardized digital rectal examination (DRE) correlates with anorectal manometry (ARM) measures. However, less is known about the relationship between DRE/ARM measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), especially among women with fecal incontinence (FI). Our aims were to evaluate associations between DRE and ARM measures and compare PROs with diagnostic evaluation measures for women with FI.

Methods: We analyzed data from the parent clinical trial, Controlling Anal incontinence by Performing Anal exercises with Biofeedback or Loperamide (CAPABLe). We pooled data from randomized women who completed standardized ARM, DRE, and validated PROs at baseline and 12 and 24 weeks post-treatment initiation. PROs included FI severity, impact on quality of life, and bowel diary data. We analyzed ARM pressure and volume data and DRE using the Digital Rectal Examination Scoring System (DRESS) resting and squeeze mean scores. We used Spearman Rank Correlation to measure associations between the ARM measures and mean DRESS scores, and between PROs and ARM/DRESS scores.

Results: Among 291 randomized women with ARM and DRE data, the correlation between DRESS and ARM resting measures was 0.196 (p<0.001) and between squeeze measures was 0.247 (p<0.001). At most timepoints, PROs more consistently correlated with squeeze ARM pressures and squeeze DRESS scores than resting measures.

Conclusions: We found weak correlations between ARM and DRE measures and between those measures and PROs. Although DRE and ARM are commonly used diagnostic measures among women with FI, the weak correlations with patient-reported symptoms raises questions about their utility in clinical care.

数字直肠检查和肛门直肠测压与大便失禁女性患者报告结果的相关性。
引言和假设:标准化数字直肠检查(DRE)与肛门直肠测压(ARM)测量结果相关。然而,人们对 DRE/ARM 测量与患者报告结果(PROs)之间的关系知之甚少,尤其是在患有大便失禁(FI)的女性中。我们的目的是评估 DRE 和 ARM 测量之间的关联,并将患者报告结果与 FI 女性患者的诊断评估测量进行比较:我们分析了母体临床试验 "通过生物反馈或洛哌丁胺进行肛门运动控制肛门失禁"(CAPABLe)的数据。我们汇总了在基线、治疗开始后 12 周和 24 周完成标准化 ARM、DRE 和有效 PROs 的随机妇女的数据。PROs 包括 FI 严重程度、对生活质量的影响以及排便日记数据。我们使用数字直肠检查评分系统 (DRESS) 分析了 ARM 压力和容量数据以及 DRE 的静息和挤压平均分。我们使用斯皮尔曼等级相关性(Spearman Rank Correlation)来测量ARM测量值与DRESS平均得分之间的关联,以及PROs与ARM/DRESS得分之间的关联:结果:在 291 名具有 ARM 和 DRE 数据的随机妇女中,DRESS 和 ARM 静态测量之间的相关性为 0.196(p 结论:我们发现 ARM 和 DRE 之间的相关性较弱:我们发现 ARM 和 DRE 测量值之间以及这些测量值与 PROs 之间的相关性较弱。虽然 DRE 和 ARM 是 FI 妇女常用的诊断方法,但它们与患者报告的症状之间的弱相关性让人怀疑它们在临床治疗中的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信