Position‐related changes in uroflowmetric parameters in healthy young men

Eryıldırım, Bilal; Tarhan, Fatih; Kuyumcuoğlu, Uğur; Erbay, Erkan; Pembegül, Necmettin

doi:10.1002/nau.20221

Cited by 21 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Devreese et al 12 studied the influence of posture of the pelvis and straining on urinary flow in healthy women in five different test situations (anteversion, anteversion with straining, retroversion, retroversion with straining, and forward bending without straining) found no significant differences for Q max , Q ave , and total time in between positions, though straining affected these parameters.Eryildirim et al 13 from Turkey demonstrated Q max , Q ave , and cQ max be higher in sitting and squatting positions in comparison to standing position which is in contrast to our study. The natural voiding positions of participants were not mentioned in their study, which may have had a bearing on the results.…”

Section: Position Related Changes In Uroflow: Literature Reviewcontrasting

confidence: 99%

Which voiding position is associated with lowest flow rates in healthy adult men? role of natural voiding position

Choudhury

Agarwal

Mandal

et al. 2009

Neurourology and Urodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Position Related Changes In Uroflow: Literature Reviewcontrasting

confidence: 99%

Which voiding position is associated with lowest flow rates in healthy adult men? role of natural voiding position

Choudhury

Agarwal

Mandal

et al. 2009

Neurourology and Urodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9 Eryıldırım and colleagues found that Qmax and Qave values were significantly higher in the sitting and squatting positions. 10 Conversely, Choudry and colleagues found that Qmax and Qave values were significantly lower in sitting position.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The best position for emptying the bladder is controversial and not yet established. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] There are no studies which assess the effects of alpha blockers on PVR volumes in different voiding positions. We evaluated the effect of the sitting and standing voiding positions on uroflowmetric parameters and PVR in patients over 50 years old and with LUTS due to BPH.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, higher pressure transmission on the urinary bladder is due to increased intra-abdominal pressure in the sitting position; second, pelvic floor muscles are more relaxed during the sitting position, which leads to an increased flow rate. 10,18 Also patient comfort, psychology and preferred voiding position affect the maximum flow rate. If an individual is accustomed to voiding in a certain position, changing it can cause stress and discomfort -these can affect uroflowmetric parameters.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of alpha blockers on uroflowmetric parameters in different voiding positions

Koç

Yüksel

Ün

et al. 2013

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:We assessed the effect of different voiding positions on uroflowmetric parameters and post-void residual (PVR) urine volume in symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients. We also evaluated the effect of alpha blockers on PVR in different voiding positions. Methods:The study was performed with 110 BPH patients over 50 years old. In total, 4 uroflowmetries were performed in all patients: 2 patients in the sitting position and 2 in the standing position. PVR was measured with transabdominal ultrasonography. Also, patients were divided into two groups according to the alpha adrenergic blocker treatment; the effect of this treatment on their uroflowmetric parameters in different positions was evaluated. Results: Maximum flow rate (Qmax) and average flow rate (Qave) were significantly higher in patients in the sitting position, but there were no differences in other uroflowmetric parameters and PVR volume (Qmax: 15.5±5.9 mL/s vs. 13.7±5.2 mL/s, Qave: 11.4±4.6 mL/s vs. 10.7± 3.9 mL/s, respectively; p < 0.05). The Qmax and Qave were significantly higher in sitting position, compared to the standing position, in both alpha adrenergic treatment and non-treated groups; again, there were no differences in other uroflowmetric parameters and PVR volume. Conclusion: Qmax and Qave values were significantly higher in the sitting position. Alpha blockers did not affect any change.

show abstract

“…However, it is essential to remember that the uroflowmetric parameters have been UI J A number of studies are available in the literature with specific aims that are completely like ours [5][6][7][8][9] or relatively similar to ours [2,3,[10][11][12][13]. Many studies have reported differences in voiding parameters with different positions [1,3,[5][6][7][8]10,12,13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Voiding Position on Uroflowmetric Parameters in Healthy Young Men

Amjadi¹,

Hajebrahimi²,

Soleimanzadeh³

2011

UIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations and AcronymsAFR, average flow rate Qmax, peak flow rate ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: Voiding quality can theoretically be affected by voiding position. It is important to know the effect of voiding position on urometric parameters in order to obtain optimal diagnostic test results, compare data across research investigations, and make recommendations about voiding position for the management of voiding problems. This prospective study was designed to evaluate the effect of changes in voiding position on uroflowmetric findings of young, healthy men. METHODS:The participants were 31 male volunteers who were asymptomatic of urological disorder. They had an average age of 29.2 years (range, 23-39 years). In each of standing, sitting, and squatting positions, 2 measurements were done (6 separate measurements for each case) and the mean of each pair was determined.Outcome measures were peak flow rate (Qmax), average flow rate, time to peak flow, flow time, and voided volume. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare the voiding positions; a probability value < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:The results for the standing, sitting and squatting positions were: mean Qmax of 23.4, 24.4, and 25.8 mL/s, respectively (P = .618); mean for average flow rates of 13.4, 13.0, and 13.9 mL/s, respectively (P = .813); mean flow times of 23.9, 22.1, and 22.9 seconds, respectively (P = .822); mean time to peak flow of 7.8, 8.0, and 6.0 seconds, respectively (P = .119); and mean voided volume of 300, 275, and 290 mL, respectively (P = .631). CONCLUSION:The present study revealed no statistically significant differences between the standing, sitting, or squatting voiding positions for any of the measured urodynamic parameters. A precise judgment about the effect of voiding position on the uroflowmetric measures of healthy young males needs more investigation using a large number of cases, preferably with heterogeneous typical voiding positions. UroToday International Journal ® UI J

show abstract

Position‐related changes in uroflowmetric parameters in healthy young men

Abstract: Our results suggest that the urinary flow rates are affected by the voiding position. Therefore, it is important to perform uroflowmetric measurements in the same position.

Cited by 21 publications

References 11 publications

Which voiding position is associated with lowest flow rates in healthy adult men? role of natural voiding position

Which voiding position is associated with lowest flow rates in healthy adult men? role of natural voiding position

The effect of alpha blockers on uroflowmetric parameters in different voiding positions

The Effect of Voiding Position on Uroflowmetric Parameters in Healthy Young Men

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About