Reliability of the international spinal cord injury urodynamic basic data set version 1.0

Abstract

Study design

A cross-sectional study.

Objective

To assess interrater and intrarater reliability of the International Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Urodynamic Basic Data Set (UBS) version 1.0.

Setting

Urodynamic clinic at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital.

Methods

Two raters independently analyzed urodynamic tracings from 50 patients and completed the UBS twice, each test 1 month apart. The interrater and intrarater reliability of this data set were analyzed using Kappa, Weighted Kappa, and the Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results

Of the 50 patients, 72% were male. The mean (SD) age was 48.2 (16.6) years. The median time (IQR) since the injury was 27 months (0–101 months). The interrater reliability of the items of UBS were substantial to almost perfect (0.78–0.99). The intrarater reliability of the first rater was fair to almost perfect (0.37–1.00). The intrarater reliability of the second rater was moderate to almost perfect (0.51–1.00). Relatively low interrater and intrarater reliability were observed in bladder compliance and urethral function items.

Conclusion

The first version of UBS has acceptable interrater and intrarater reliability on most items. Although bladder compliance and urethral function have problematic interrater and intrarater reliability, they have been adjusted in the second version. Due to its simplicity and reliability, UBS is clinically useful for urodynamic assessment in people with SCI.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. 1.

    Todd AL, Donald RB, Graham HC, Bruce GG, Suzanne LG, Angela J. Bladder management for adults with spinal cord injury: a clinical practice guideline for health-care providers. J Spinal Cord Med. 2006;29:527–73.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Nosseir M, Hinkel A, Pannek J. Clinical usefulness of urodynamic assessment for maintenance of bladder function in patients with spinal cord injury. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26:228–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Danforth TL, Ginsberg DA. Neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction: how, when, and with which patients do we use urodynamics? Urol Clin North Am. 2014;41:445–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Biering-Sorensen F, Craggs M, Kennelly M, Schick E, Wyndaele JJ. International urodynamic basic spinal cord injury data set. Spinal Cord 2008;46:513–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Biering-Sorensen F, Charlifue S, DeVivo M, Noonan V, Post M, Stripling T, et al. International spinal cord injury data sets. Spinal Cord 2006;44:530–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Rosier P, Schaefer W, Lose G, Goldman HB, Guralnick M, Eustice S, et al. International continence society good urodynamic practices and terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure-flow study. Neurourol Urodyn 2017;36:1243–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    DeVivo M, Biering-Sorensen F, Charlifue S, Noonan V, Post M, Stripling T, et al. International spinal cord injury core data set. Spinal Cord 2006;44:535–40.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Biering-Sorensen F, Craggs M, Kennelly M, Schick E, Wyndaele JJ. The international spinal cord injury urodynamic basic data set version 1.0 training cases English [Online]. 2007 [Cited 2016 Nov 13]. http://www.iscos.org.uk//international-sci-urodynamic-data-sets.

  9. 9.

    Biering-Sorensen F, Alexander MS, Burns S, Charlifue S, DeVivo M, Dietz V, et al. Recommendations for translation and reliability testing of international spinal cord injury data sets. Spinal Cord 2011;49:357–60.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther. 2005;85:257–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sainani KL. Reliability statistics. PM R 2017;9:622–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Stohrer M, Goepel M, Kondo A, Kramer G, Madersbacher H, Millard R, et al. The standardization of terminology in neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction: with suggestions for diagnostic procedures. International Continence Society Standardization Committee. Neurourol Urodyn 1999;18:139–58.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Venhola M, Reunanen M, Taskinen S, Lahdes-Vasama T, Uhari M. Interobserver and intra-observer agreement in interpreting urodynamic measurements in children. J Urol. 2003;169:2344–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Whiteside JL, Hijaz A, Imrey PB, Barber MD, Paraiso MF, Rackley RR, et al. Reliability and agreement of urodynamics interpretations in a female pelvic medicine center. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:315–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Dudley AG, Casella DP, Lauderdale CJ, Zhao S, Chen H, Tanaka ST, et al. Interrater reliability in pediatric urodynamic tracings: a pilot study. J Urol. 2017;197:865–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Pannek J, Kennelly M, Kessler TM, Linsenmeyer T, Wyndaele JJ, Biering-Sørensen F. International spinal cord injury urodynamic basic data set (version 2.0). Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2018;4:98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

KD designed the research questions, collected, and analyzed the data, drafted the paper, and wrote the final version of the paper. SP collected and analyzed the data, drafted the paper, and wrote the final version of the paper. TH designed the research questions and commented on the final version of the paper. ST designed the research question, collected, and analyzed the data and commented on the final version of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siam Tongprasert.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study protocol was exempted from ethical approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand since no identifiable data of the sampled tracings were exposed to the researchers. The authors certify that all applicable institutional and governmental regulations concerning the ethical use of human volunteers were followed during all courses of this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dejkriengkraikul, K., Pattanakuhar, S., Hama, T. et al. Reliability of the international spinal cord injury urodynamic basic data set version 1.0. Spinal Cord (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-020-0496-5

Download citation