De-implementation of urodynamics in The Netherlands after the VALUE/VUSIS-2 results: a nationwide survey

• Published in: International Urogynecology Journal Vol. 29; no. 9; pp. 1261 - 1277
• Main Authors: Mengerink, Bianca B., Nelen, Willianne L. D. M., van Leijsen, Sanne A. L., Heesakkers, John P. F. A., Kluivers, Kirsten B.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Springer London 01.09.2018; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Gynecology; Humans; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Netherlands; Original; Original Article; Physicians; Suburethral Slings; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery; Urodynamics; Urology; Netherlands; Urodynamics; Midurethral sling surgery; Stress urinary incontinence; De-implementation
• ISSN: 0937-3462; 1433-3023
• DOI: 10.1007/s00192-018-3648-9

Introduction and hypothesis We aimed to estimate the level of de-implementation of preoperative routine urodynamics (UDS) before stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery in The Netherlands and to analyze facilitators and barriers. Routine UDS was performed by 37% of the medical specialists in 2010. We hypothesized that the recommendations from the recent Value of Urodynamics prior to Stress Incontinence Surgery (VUSIS) and Value of Urodynamic Evaluation (ValUE) studies would have been followed by a reduction of routine UDS. Methods A national survey was performed among all Dutch gynecologists and urologists dealing with SUI in daily practice. The questionnaire contained two parts: (1) respondents’ characteristics and their actual care concerning preoperative UDS, and (2) facilitators and barriers. Results The response rate was 41% (127/308). Of the respondents, 93% ( n  = 118) did not perform routine UDS in the preoperative workup for women in this group. Professional characteristics associated with not following the recommendations were profession urologist, academic hospital, and a lower number of midurethral sling (MUS) placed yearly. Facilitators to follow the recommendation not to perform routine UDS were adequate design of the VUSIS-II study and outcome and recommendations from the studies. Barriers not to follow the recommendation were believe in the additional value of UDS, especially the pressure transmission ratio, and the presence of detrusor overactivity. Conclusion According to respondents to this questionnaire, VUSIS-II and ValUE study results are well implemented in The Netherlands. The vast majority of respondents replied as not performing routine preoperative UDS in women with primary, uncomplicated (predominant) SUI. Therefore, there is no need for a further de-implementation strategy.