Adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the management and follow-up of patients with urinary incontinence in a specialized center in Colombia

Adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the management and follow-up of patients with urinary incontinence in a specialized center in Colombia

Mauricio A. Medina-Rico 1 , Natalia Barco-Barco 1 , Valentina Castillo-Ospina 1 , Alisson Viveros-Sinisterra 1

1 Semillero de Investigación Urología, Calculaser S.A., Risaralda, Pereira, Colombia

*Correspondence: Natalia Barco-Barco. Email: nataliabarcob9@gmail.com

Abstract

Objective: To identify adherence to the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in a specialized center and compare the results with studies from other centers. Method: A cross-sectional study using a database of patients who underwent surgery between 2017 and 2023 for SUI using cystourethropexy with transobturator tape (TOT), tension-free vaginal tape (TVT), autologous fascia, or urethral agent application. A demographic description of the sample was conducted; adherence was assessed using the American and European guidelines for the management of SUI. Data were recorded and stored in an Excel spreadsheet, and data were analyzed using Stata-14. Results: A total of 1,192 medical records were reviewed from patients with a mean age of 55 years. Preoperative urodynamics was performed in 62% of the patients. Finally, in 5.9% of the cases, pelvic floor therapy and lifestyle changes were indicated before considering surgery. More than 90% of the surgeries performed were cystourethropexies, with TOT being the most commonly used technique. Conclusions: Local adherence to CPGs appears to be lower in both the diagnosis and management of SUI compared to other studies.

Keywords: Clinical practice guidelines. Stress urinary incontinence. Adherence to clinical practice guidelines.

Contents

Content available only in Spanish.

⇄ Versión en Español
DOI not available
Add to Mendeley

Content available only in Spanish.

    English versión
    DOI not available

    Editorial times

    The editorial process consists of 6 stages:

    1. Reception of the manuscript (indeterminate, depending on whether the author meets the requirements): its objective is to verify that the manuscript complies with the specifications of these instructions for authors and that the submitted documentation is complete.

    2. Initial editorial review (maximum 5 business days): its objective is to corroborate the relevance, timeliness, originality, and scientific contribution of the manuscript, as well as the methodological and statistical soundness of the study. At this time, it will be submitted to an electronic plagiarism detection system. Derived from this, a rejected opinion may be obtained, or it will be sent for review by peer researchers.

    3. Review by peer researchers (maximum 30 business days): the opinion of at least two experts in the area in question will be obtained, who will evaluate the technical and methodological aspects of the investigation.

    4. Editorial review (maximum 7 business days): its objective is to make a decision based on the opinion of peer reviewers. The opinion can be rejected, major changes, minor changes or accepted. In the case of major or minor changes, it will be submitted again for evaluation by the initial peer reviewers.

    5. Final edition (6 weeks): its objective is the technical and linguistic edition (and translation), layout of galleys, DOI assignment, and correction by the author.

    6. Advanced publication: All manuscripts will be published ahead of print on the journal’s website as soon as they complete the editing process, until they are incorporated into a final issue of the journal.