| Recruitment status | Completed |
| Unique ID issued by UMIN | UMIN000023203 |
| Receipt No. | R000026699 |
| Scientific Title | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses, in postoperative patients of gynecological cancer |
| Date of disclosure of the study information | 2016/07/21 |
| Last modified on | 2019/09/08 (Ver. 6) |
| Basic information | ||
| Public title | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses, in postoperative patients of gynecological cancer | |
| Acronym | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses, in postoperative patients of gynecological cancer | |
| Scientific Title | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses, in postoperative patients of gynecological cancer | |
| Scientific Title:Acronym | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses, in postoperative patients of gynecological cancer | |
| Region |
|
|
| Condition | |||
| Condition | postoperative voiding disorders | ||
| Classification by specialty |
|
||
| Classification by malignancy | Malignancy | ||
| Genomic information | NO | ||
| Objectives | |
| Narrative objectives1 | As radical operation for cervical or endometrial cancer, gynecological oncologists perform semi radical hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy. Urination disorders such as the loss of micturition desire or the increase in residual urine volume are at risk of appearing after these operation. In our hospital, the nurses evaluate residual urine volume by urethral catheterization. For evaluation of the residual urine volume, nurses could use simplified devices (BLADDER SCAN), but it doesn not have good accuracy for postoperative patient with gynecological cancer because of retention of lymph fluid or ascites. If nurses come to be able to evaluate the residual urine by the ultrasonic measurement, the burden on patient may be largely reduced. However, few reports of the precision of the residual urine estimation by the ultrasonic measurement by the nurse, have been reported yet, and it is necessary to inspect the diagnostic efficacy. |
| Basic objectives2 | Efficacy |
| Basic objectives -Others | |
| Trial characteristics_1 | |
| Trial characteristics_2 | |
| Developmental phase | |
| Assessment | |
| Primary outcomes | Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume using catheterization as a golden standard |
| Key secondary outcomes | |
| Base | |
| Study type | Interventional |
| Study design | |
| Basic design | Single arm |
| Randomization | Non-randomized |
| Randomization unit | |
| Blinding | Open -no one is blinded |
| Control | Uncontrolled |
| Stratification | |
| Dynamic allocation | |
| Institution consideration | |
| Blocking | |
| Concealment | |
| Intervention | |||
| No. of arms | 1 | ||
| Purpose of intervention | Diagnosis | ||
| Type of intervention |
|
||
| Interventions/Control_1 | ultrasound estimation of residual urine volume by nurses | ||
| Interventions/Control_2 | |||
| Interventions/Control_3 | |||
| Interventions/Control_4 | |||
| Interventions/Control_5 | |||
| Interventions/Control_6 | |||
| Interventions/Control_7 | |||
| Interventions/Control_8 | |||
| Interventions/Control_9 | |||
| Interventions/Control_10 | |||
| Eligibility | ||||
| Age-lower limit |
|
|||
| Age-upper limit |
|
|||
| Gender | Female | |||
| Key inclusion criteria | patients who are scheduled to undergo semi-radical or radical hysterectomy/tracherectomy and/or opatoperative patient | |||
| Key exclusion criteria | The patients under 20 years old
The patients who does not receive explanation about urination disorders The patients who did not agree The patients who are not appropriate for ultrasound estimation, such as those who have surgical site infection on abdominal incision. The patients who should be inserted a ureteral catheter by underlying diseases or postoperative complications. |
|||
| Target sample size | 70 | |||
| Research contact person | |||||||
| Name of lead principal investigator |
|
||||||
| Organization | Keio university hospital | ||||||
| Division name | Department of nursing | ||||||
| Zip code | 1608582 | ||||||
| Address | 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan | ||||||
| TEL | 03-5363-3719 | ||||||
| m.kamoshita@adst.keio.ac.jp | |||||||
| Public contact | |||||||
| Name of contact person |
|
||||||
| Organization | Keio university hospital | ||||||
| Division name | Department of nursing | ||||||
| Zip code | 1608582 | ||||||
| Address | 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan | ||||||
| TEL | 03-5363-3719 | ||||||
| Homepage URL | |||||||
| m.kamoshita@adst.keio.ac.jp | |||||||
| Sponsor | |
| Institute | Department of nursing, Keio university hospital
|
| Institute | |
| Department | |
| Funding Source | |
| Organization | None |
| Organization | |
| Division | |
| Category of Funding Organization | Self funding |
| Nationality of Funding Organization | |
| Other related organizations | |
| Co-sponsor | |
| Name of secondary funder(s) | |
| IRB Contact (For public release) | |
| Organization | Keio University IRB |
| Address | 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan |
| Tel | 03-3353-1211 |
| med-rinri-jimu@adst.keio.ac.jp | |
| Secondary IDs | |
| Secondary IDs | NO |
| Study ID_1 | |
| Org. issuing International ID_1 | |
| Study ID_2 | |
| Org. issuing International ID_2 | |
| IND to MHLW | |
| Institutions | |
| Institutions | |
| Other administrative information | |||||||
| Date of disclosure of the study information |
|
||||||
| Related information | |
| URL releasing protocol | |
| Publication of results | Partially published |
| Result | |||||||
| URL related to results and publications | https://jsgo.or.jp/60/common/program.pdf | ||||||
| Number of participants that the trial has enrolled | 60 | ||||||
| Results | The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonic estimation judging less than 100ml or more was 69.5%, 54.9% and 91.5%, respectively. The accuracy may be improved by nurses experiences. The error value was larger when residual urine volume was less than 100ml and lymphedema existed. It is considered difficult to utilize ultrasound as a screening tool due to its low sensitivity. It may be useful by patient selections and training of nurse practitioners.. |
||||||
| Results date posted |
|
||||||
| Results Delayed | |||||||
| Results Delay Reason | |||||||
| Date of the first journal publication of results | |||||||
| Baseline Characteristics | |||||||
| Participant flow | |||||||
| Adverse events | |||||||
| Outcome measures | |||||||
| Plan to share IPD | |||||||
| IPD sharing Plan description | |||||||
| Progress | |||||||
| Recruitment status | Completed | ||||||
| Date of protocol fixation |
|
||||||
| Date of IRB |
|
||||||
| Anticipated trial start date |
|
||||||
| Last follow-up date |
|
||||||
| Date of closure to data entry | |||||||
| Date trial data considered complete | |||||||
| Date analysis concluded | |||||||
| Other | |
| Other related information | |
| Management information | |||||||
| Registered date |
|
||||||
| Last modified on |
|
||||||
| Link to view the page | |
| URL(English) | https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000026699 |