Evaluation of consistency between physician clinical impression and 3 validated survey instruments for measuring lower urinary tract symptoms in children - Abstract

Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers University and Division of Urology, Section of Pediatric Urology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.


Since many children with lower urinary tract symptoms are treated based on history and physical, it is important to know which symptom survey correlates best with the physician clinical impression. We evaluated 3 tools that have been demonstrated to predict severity of lower urinary tract symptoms, the Dysfunctional Voiding Symptom Score, the Akbal survey and the Nelson survey. Total scores from each survey were compared to clinical impression.

Participants consisted of 36 males and 35 females referred to our pediatric urology center for lower urinary tract symptoms. A total of 37 children 4 to 10 years old completed the Dysfunctional Voiding Symptom Score with the help of their parents, and 34 of these parents completed the Akbal survey. A total of 35 children 11 to 17 years old completed the Nelson survey. Scores from the 3 instruments were compared to the clinical impression of a pediatric urologist using rank correlation (Kendall's tau-b test).

Mean total symptom scores were increased relative to physician rating for all 3 surveys. Symptoms reported by younger children using the Dysfunctional Voiding Symptom Score correlated better with physician rating of symptom severity (tau-b 0.43) compared to symptoms reported by parents using the Akbal survey (tau-b 0.41). Older children reporting symptoms using the Nelson survey had the strongest correlation with physician clinical impression (tau-b 0.48).

All 3 surveys were statistically significantly correlated with the physician impression of severity for lower urinary tract symptoms, with the Nelson survey being the most accurate.

Written by:
Schneider D, Yamamoto A, Barone JG.   Are you the author?

Reference: J Urol. 2011 Jul;186(1):261-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.049

PubMed Abstract
PMID: 21600599

UroToday.com Pediatric Urology Section



email news signup