Background: To date, there has been no validated method to identify cases of pelvic floor disorders in primary care electronic medical record (EMR) data. We aimed to develop and validate symptom-based case definitions for urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women, for use in primary care epidemiologic or clinical research.
Methods: Our retrospective study used EMR data from the Southern Alberta Primary Care Research Network (SAPCReN) and the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) in southern Alberta. Trained researchers remotely reviewed a random sample of EMR charts of women aged 18 years or older from 6 rural and urban clinics to validate case definitions for urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), and estimated SAPCReN prevalence as appropriate.
Results: Charts of 900 women were included. Sensitivity was 81.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75.1-87.2) for urinary incontinence, 61.2% (95% CI 46.2-74.5) for fecal incontinence, and 51.8% (95% CI 40.6-62.8) for pelvic organ prolapse. Corresponding specificity values were 71.9% (95% CI 68.4-75.1), 99.2% (95% CI 98.2-99.6) and 98.8% (95% CI 97.7-99.4), PPVs 40.6% (95% CI 35.4-46.0), 81.1% (95% CI 64.3-91.4) and 81.1% (95% CI 67.6-90.1), and NPVs 94.4% (95% CI 92.1-96.1), 97.8% (95% CI 96.5-98.6) and 95.3% (95% CI 93.6-96.6). The SAPCReN-observed prevalence for urinary incontinence was 29.7% (95% CI 29.3-30.0), but the adjusted prevalence was 2.97%.
Interpretation: The case definition for urinary incontinence met our standard for validity (sensitivity and specificity > 70%), and the case definitions for fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse had PPVs greater than 80%. The urinary incontinence definition may be used in epidemiologic research, and those for fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse may be used in quality-improvement studies or creation of disease registries. Our symptom-based case definitions could also be adapted for research in other EMR settings.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7269601 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20190145 | DOI Listing |
J Surg Res
January 2025
Department of Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Introduction: Access to rehabilitation services after a traumatic injury improves functional outcomes. No study has examined the association between injury intent, violent versus nonviolent, and receipt of rehabilitation services after injury.
Materials And Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of injured adult patients admitted to our level I trauma center from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2021.
Clin Orthop Relat Res
January 2025
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, TX, USA.
Background: A number of efforts have been made to tailor behavioral healthcare treatments to the variable needs of patients with low back pain (LBP). The most common approach involves the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) to triage the need for psychologically informed care, which explores concerns about pain and addresses unhelpful beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Such beliefs that pain always signifies injury or tissue damage and that exercise should be avoided have been implied as psychosocial mediators of chronic pain and can impede recovery.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFN Engl J Med
January 2025
From Bielefeld University, Medical School and University Medical Center Ostwestfalen-Lippe, Campus Hospital Lippe, Detmold, Germany (J.H.); the Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria (T.B.); the Clinical Trials Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany (C.S.); the Institute of Surgical Pathology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Germany (P.B.); the Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany (B.K., T.K.); Comprehensive Cancer Center Augsburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany (R.C.); the Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany (S.U.); the Department of General, Visceral, and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany (J.R.I.); the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute and San Raffaele Vita-Salute University, Milan (I.G.); the Department of General, Visceral, Thoracic, and Endocrine Surgery, Johannes Wesling University Hospital Minden, Ruhr University Bochum, Minden, Germany (B.G.); the Department of General, Visceral, and Pediatric Surgery, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany (M.G.); the Department of General, Visceral, Thoracic, Transplantation, and Pediatric Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany (B.R.); the Department of General, Visceral, Transplantation, Vascular, and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (J.F.L.); the Department of General, Visceral, Cancer, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany (C.B.); the Department of Hematology and Oncology, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach am Main, Germany (E.R.); the Department of Surgery, Klinikum Dortmund, Klinikum der Universität Witten-Herdecke, Dortmund, Germany (M.S.); the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany (F.B.); the Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (G.F.); the Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Cancer Immunology, Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin (P.T.-P.); the Department of General, Visceral, Cancer, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany (U.P.N.); the Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany (A.P.); the Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany (D.I.); the Division of Gastroenterology, Rheumatology, and Infectology, Department of Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin (S.D.); the Department of Surgery, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany (T.S.); the Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Erlangen, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany (C.K.); the Department of Medicine II, Saarland University Medical Center, Saarland University, Homburg, Germany (S.Z.); the Department of General, Visceral, and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig Maximilian University Hospital, Munich, Germany (J.W.); the Department of Internal Medicine I, Klinikum Mutterhaus der Borromaerinnen, Trier, Germany (R.M.); the Departments of Hematology, Oncology, and Palliative Care, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany (G.I.); the Department of General, Visceral, and Transplant Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany (P.G.); and the Department of Medicine II, University Cancer Center Leipzig, Cancer Center Central Germany, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany (F.L.).
Background: The best multimodal approach for resectable locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is unclear. An important question is whether perioperative chemotherapy is preferable to preoperative chemoradiotherapy.
Methods: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized trial, we assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma to receive perioperative chemotherapy with FLOT (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel) plus surgery or preoperative chemoradiotherapy (radiotherapy at a dose of 41.
J Med Internet Res
January 2025
Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigacio Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer, Barcelona, Spain.
Background: Enhancing self-management in health care through digital tools is a promising strategy to empower patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) to improve self-care.
Objective: This study evaluates whether the Greenhabit (mobile health [mHealth]) behavioral treatment enhances T2D outcomes compared with standard care.
Methods: A 12-week, parallel, single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted with 123 participants (62/123, 50%, female; mean age 58.
JMIR Ment Health
January 2025
School of Applied Psychology & Centre for Mental Health, Griffith University, Mt Gravatt, Australia.
Background: Self-guided internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) achieves greater reach than ICBT delivered with therapist guidance, but demonstrates poorer engagement and fewer clinical benefits. Alternative models of care are required that promote engagement and are effective, accessible, and scalable.
Objective: This randomized trial evaluated whether a stepped care approach to ICBT using therapist guidance via videoconferencing for the step-up component (ICBT-SC[VC]) is noninferior to ICBT with full therapist delivery by videoconferencing (ICBT-TG[VC]) for child and adolescent anxiety.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!