Oral Health and Diagnostic Sciences

Scopus Publication Detail

The publication detail shows the title, authors (with indicators showing other profiled authors), information on the publishing organization, abstract and a link to the article in Scopus. This abstract is what is used to create the fingerprint of the publication.

Diagnostic accuracy of visual urethral mobility exam versus Q-Tip test: A randomized crossover trial

Barbara Lynn Robinson; Elizabeth Joanne Geller; Brent Ashley Parnell; Andrea Kuntaraf Crane; Mary Lee Jannelli; Ellen Casper Wells; Annamarie Connolly; Catherine Ann Matthews (Profiled Authors: Brent A Parnell; Barbara Lynn Robinson)

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2012;206(6):528.e1-528.e6.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of a visual urethral mobility examination (VUME) with a Q-Tip test in the assessment of urethral hypermobility. STUDY DESIGN: Subjects were randomized to a VUME or Q-Tip test first, followed by the alternate assessment. Outcomes included hypermobile, not hypermobile, or indeterminate. Hypermobility was defined as 30° or greater from the horizontal. Pain perception and test preference were assessed. RESULTS: For the 54 subjects, 61.1% demonstrated hypermobility on VUME vs 72.2% on the Q-Tip test (P =.39). Assessment of hypermobility was correlated between the 2 tools (ρ = 0.47, P =.001). Positive and negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity for VUME were 88%, 56%, 78%, and 71%, respectively, with a Q-Tip test as the reference standard. Mean pain score on visual analog scale was 0.72 for VUME and 3.15 for Q-tip test (P <.001). VUME was preferred by 83% of subjects. CONCLUSION: VUME is a diagnostic alternative to the Q-Tip test for the assessment of urethral hypermobility and is preferred by subjects. © 2012 Mosby, Inc.

PMID: 22459346    

Scientific Context

This section shows information related to the publication - computed using the fingerprint of the publication - including related publications, related experts with fingerprints representing significant amounts of overlap between their fingerprint and this publication. The red dots indicate whether those experts or terms appear within the publication, thereby showing potential and actual connections.