Comparison of the diagnostic yield of routine versus indicated flowmetry, ultrasound and cystoscopy in women with recurrent urinary tract infections.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To quantify and compare the outcomes of routine vs. urologist-requested diagnostic testing for recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTI). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with rUTI referred to a large non-academic teaching hospital between 2016 and 2018 (Hospital A) and a university hospital between 2014 and 2016 (Hospital B). Electronic medical records were reviewed for baseline and diagnostic data. Women underwent the following assessments routinely: urinalysis, voiding diary, flowmetry in Hospital A and urinalysis, voiding diary, flowmetry, ultrasound, abdominal x-ray and cystoscopy in Hospital B. All other diagnostics were performed by indication in each hospital. RESULTS: We included 295 women from Hospital A and 298 from Hospital B, among whom the mean age (57.6 years) and mean UTI frequency (5.6/year) were comparable, though more were postmenopausal in Hospital A. We identified abnormalities by flowmetry or post-void residual volumes in 134 patients (Hospital A: 79; Hospital B: 55), cystoscopy in 14 patients (Hospital A: 6; Hospital B: 8) and ultrasound in 42 patients (Hospital A: 16; Hospital B: 26), but these differences were not significant. Diagnostics altered treatment in 117 patients (e.g., pelvic floor muscle training, referral to another specialist, surgical intervention), mostly due to flowmetry and post-void residual volume measurement. The retrospective design and absence of follow-up data limit these results. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of cystoscopy and ultrasound in female patients with rUTIs should not be recommended as they yield few abnormalities and lead to additional costs.

Quality appraisal of clinical guidelines for recurrent urinary tract infections using AGREE II: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Recommendations for preventing and diagnosing recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI) tend to vary between clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) because of low-quality scientific evidence, potentially leading to practice variation and suboptimal care. We assessed the quality of existing CPGs for recurrent UTI. METHODS: A systematic search was performed from January 2000 to June 2021 in PubMed and EMBASE for CPGs on recurrent UTI prevention or hospital diagnostics in Dutch, English, and Spanish. Each CPG was assessed by four appraisers in a multidisciplinary review team, using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. RESULTS: We identified and assessed eight CPGs published between 2013 and 2021. The scope and purpose (mean and standard deviation: 67.3 ± 21.8) and clarity of presentation (74.8 ± 17.6) domains scored highly. However, issues with methods, patient participation, conflict of interests, and facilitators and barriers were common and resulted in lower scores for the rigour of development (56.9 ± 25.9), applicability (19.6 ± 23.4), stakeholder involvement (50.4 ± 24.6), and editorial independence (62.1 ± 23.1) domains. Overall, two CPGs were recommended, three were recommended with modifications, and three were not recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Significant room for improvement exists in the quality of CPGs for recurrent UTI, with most displaying serious limitations in the stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, and applicability domains. These aspects must be improved to decrease diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty. Developers could benefit from using checklists and following guidelines when developing de novo CPGs.