Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Uroflowmetry: its current clinical utility for women

  • Current Opinion / Update
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Uroflowmetry, the simple, non-invasive measurement of urine flow over time during micturition, has a long and interesting history, clear definitions, a clear purpose in screening for voiding difficulty and, most importantly, technical accuracy. Data interpretation is currently limiting its clinical utility, despite appropriate analysis being available in long-standing existing research. The main clinically important numerical parameters are the maximum and average urine flow rates and the voided volume. Urine flow rates are strongly dependent on voided volume. Reference to established (Liverpool) nomograms will most accurately correct for this dependency. Nomograms will also optimise the validation of uroflowmetry data and the accurate assessment of its normality, compared with fixed urine flow rates and “cutoffs” for voided volume. Abnormally slow urine flow (under the 10th centile Liverpool Nomograms) is the most clinically significant abnormality. Repeat uroflowmetry, concomitant post-void residual measurement and voiding cystometry studies are appropriate options for evaluating any abnormal uroflowmetry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rehfisch E (1897) Ueber den mechanismus des harnblasenverschlusses under der harnentkerung. Virchow Arch Path Anat 150:1111–1151

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ryall RL, Marshall VR (1983) Measurement of urinary flow rate. Urology 22:556–564

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gronwell H (1925) Blastomningens mechanism. Sven Lakartidn 22:577

    Google Scholar 

  4. Drake WM Jr (1948) The uroflowmeter: an aid to the study of the urinary tract. J Urol 59:650–658

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Von Garrelts B (1956) Analysis of micturition. A new method of recording the voiding of the bladder. Acta Chir Scand 112:326–340

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rowan D, McKenzie AL, McNee SG, Glen ES (1977) A technical and clinical evaluation of the Disa uroflowmeter. Brit J Urol 49:285–293

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Peter WP, Drake WM Jr (1958) Uroflowmetric observations in gynaecologic patients. JAMA 166:721–724

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Farrar DJ, Osborne JL (1984) Voiding dysfunction in women. In: Mundy AR, Stephensen TP, Wein AJ (eds) Urodynamics: principles, practice and application, chapter 23. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 242–248

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bergman A, Bhatia NN (1985) Uroflowmetry for predicting postoperative voiding difficulties in women with stress urinary incontinence. Brit J Obstet Gynaecol 92:835–838

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Axelrod SL, Blaivas JG (1987) Bladder neck obstruction in women. J Urol 137:497–499

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Torrens MJ (1987) Urodynamics. In: Torrens MJ (ed) The physiology of the lower urinary tract, chapter 9. Springer, Berlin, pp 277–307

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bates P, Glen ES, Griffiths D, for the International Continence Society et al (1977) Second report on the standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function, procedures related to the evaluation of micturition—flow rate, pressure measurement, symbols. Scand J Urol Nephrol 11:197–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Haylen BT, Lee J (2008) The accuracy of measurement of the postvoid residual in women. Int Urogynecol J DOI 10.1007/s00192-008-0568-0

  14. Wyndaele J-JJM (2006) Uroflowmetry. In: Cardozo LD, Staskin D (eds) Textbook of female urology and urogynecology. Informa Healthcare, Oxford, pp 216–221

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nitti VW, Fischer MC (2008) Urodynamics. In: Bent AE, Cundiff GW, Swift SE (eds) Urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction. Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, p 79

    Google Scholar 

  16. Moore KH, Richmond DH, Sutherst JR et al (1991) Crouching over a toilet seat: prevalence amongst British gynaecological outpatients and its effect on micturition. Brit J Urol 98:569–572

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Massey JA, Abrams PH (1988) Obstructed voiding in the female. Brit J Urol 61:36–39

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fantl JA, Smith PJ, Schneider V et al (1982) Fluid weight uroflowmetry in women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 145:1017–1024

    Google Scholar 

  19. Costantini E, Mearini E, Pajoncini C et al (2003) Uroflowmetry in female voiding disturbances. Neurourol Urodyn 22:569–573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fantl JA (1984) Clinical uroflowmetry. In: Ostergard DR (ed) Gynecologic urology and urodynamics: theory and practice, chapter 11. 2nd edn. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 125–132

    Google Scholar 

  21. Haylen BT, Ashby D, Sutherst JR et al (1989) Maximum and average urine flow rates in normal male and female populations—the Liverpool Nomograms. Brit J Urol 64:30–38

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Haylen BT, Law MG, Frazer MI, Schulz S (1999) Urine flow rates and residual urine volumes in urogynaecology patients. Int Urogynecol J 6:378–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Haylen BT, Parys BT, Anyaegbunam WI, Ashby D (1990) Urine flow rates in male and female urodynamic patients compared with the Liverpool Nomograms. Brit J Urol. 65:483–487

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ryall RL, Marshall VR (1982a) Normal peak urinary flow rate obtained from small voided volumes can provide a reliable assessment of bladder function. J Urol 127:484–487

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaiken DC (2000) Bladder outflow obstruction in women: definition and characteristics. Neurourol Urodyn 19:213–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Dawson T, Lawton V, Adams E, Richmond D (2007) Factors predictive of post-TVT voiding dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 18:1297–1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bottacini MR, Gleason DJ (1980) Urodynamic norms in women: normals vs stress incontinents. J Urol 124:659–661

    Google Scholar 

  28. Haylen BT, Krishnan S, Schulz S et al (2007) Has the true prevalence of voiding difficulty in urogynecology patients been underestimated? Int Urogynecol J 18:53–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Haylen BT (2007) The empty bladder. Int Urogynecol J 18:237–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ryall RL, Marshall VR (1982) The effect of a urinary catheter on the measurement of maximum urine flow rate. J Urol 128:429–432

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Vincent’s Clinic, Suite 904, 438 Victoria Street, Darlinghurst, 2010, New South Wales, Australia

    Bernard T. Haylen & Vanessa Logan

  2. St Vincent’s General Hospital, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia

    Vivian Yang

Authors
  1. Bernard T. Haylen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vivian Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vanessa Logan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernard T. Haylen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haylen, B.T., Yang, V. & Logan, V. Uroflowmetry: its current clinical utility for women. Int Urogynecol J 19, 899–903 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0597-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0597-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation