Urology and Nephrology Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
  • Register
  • Login

Urology Journal

  • Home
  • Instant Online
    • Instant 2026
    • Instant 2023
    • Instant 2021
    • Instant 2020
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Announcements
  • Submissions
  • Author Guidelines
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • Editorial Team
    • Privacy Statement
    • Contact
Advanced Search
  1. Home
  2. Archives
  3. Vol. 10 No. 4 (2013): AUTUMN
  4. UNCLASSIFIED

Vol. 10 No. 4 (2013)

Dey 2014

Effect of Voiding Position on Uroflowmetric Parameters in Healthy and Obstructed Male Patients

  • Cenk Murat Yazici
  • Polat Turker
  • Cagri Dogan

Urology Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4 (2013), 4 Dey 2014 , Page 1106-1113
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v10i4.1352 Published: 2014-01-04

  • View Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • Statastics
  • Share

Abstract

Abstract

Purpose: Uroflowmetry is frequently used and simple urodynamic test, but it may be affected by various factors. Voiding position is one of the factors that can change the results.

We tried to compare the uroflowmetric parameters in sitting and standing positions during urination.

Material and Methods: A total of 198 patients were enrolled to the study. All patients underwent an uroflowmetry in standing and sitting position at late afternoon (2-4 PM) of two corresponding days with a gravimetric uroflowmeter (Uroscan, Aymed, Turkey). A transabdominal ultrasonography was used to evaluate post voiding residue (PVR). All uroflowmetric parameters and PVR were compared with paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test.

Results: The median age of study population was 58.0 (36-69) years. There was no statistically significant difference at voided volume of patients in standing and sitting position as it was 271.5 ± 81.8 mL and 274.8 ± 82.4 mL, respectively (P = .505). Mean maximum flow rate (Qmax) during urination at standing position was 15.3 ± 6.7 mL/s while it was 15.0 ± 7.0 mL/s at sitting position (P = .29). Mean average flow rate in standing position was 8.60 ± 4.0 mL/s and 8.25 ± 3.8 mL/s in sitting position (P = .054). There was a statistically significant difference between the median post-voiding residues in standing and sitting urination which was 29.5 (0-257) mL in standing and 47.5 (2-209) mL in sitting position (P < .0001). Other uroflowmetric parameters (time to maximum flow and voiding time) was not statistically different between groups.

Conclusion: There are no clinically important uroflowmetric differences between voiding in sitting and standing positions so voiding position may be left to personal preferences during

uroflowmetric evaluation.

 

  • PDF

How to Cite

Yazici, C. M., Turker, P., & Dogan, C. (2014). Effect of Voiding Position on Uroflowmetric Parameters in Healthy and Obstructed Male Patients. Urology Journal, 10(4), 1106–1113. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v10i4.1352
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX
  • Abstract Viewed: 799 times
  • PDF Downloaded: 479 times

Download Statastics

  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Plus
  • Telegram

Information

  • For Readers
  • For Authors

Developed By

Open Journal Systems
  • Home
  • Archives
  • Submissions
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Team
  • Contact
Powered by OJSPlus