Evidence Hub

Importance of Regular Examination and Follow-up in Pediatric Patients with Neurogenic Bladder: 24-Month Follow-up Study Using a Japanese Health Insurance Database

Izumi N, Kitta T, Mitsui T

Advances in therapy, 2023

883 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction: Data on the long-term management of neurogenic bladder (NGB) are scarce. We evaluated the current status of NGB management in Japanese children over 24-month follow-up using the JMDC database.

Methods: In this descriptive, observational, retrospective cohort study, patients (≤ 17 years) with NGB were included. Patient characteristics and their management status were investigated. A multivariate analysis evaluating the potential risk factors for the development of urinary tract infection (UTI) was performed. The diagnosis of spina bifida, demographics, baseline comorbidities, and early use of clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) and/or overactive bladder (OAB) drugs were used as independent variables.

Results: Of 883 eligible children, 39.3% had spina bifida. Over 12/24-month post-index periods, renal urinary tract ultrasound and urinalysis were performed at least once in > 35%/> 45% patients, respectively, while specific tests (urodynamics, cystourethrography, scintigraphy) were performed in substantially fewer (< 11%/< 13%) patients. Over 24 months, 21.5% patients used OAB medications (mostly anticholinergics) and 10.8% underwent CIC, alone or with medications; 1.2% patients underwent surgery. Lower UTI (23.3%), urinary incontinence (9.7%), and hydronephrosis (7.0%) were the most common incident complications. Multivariate analysis evaluating risk factors for UTI showed significantly higher odds ratios with point estimates of ≥ 2 for CIC (5.70), presence…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 883 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free