Résumé
Objective A study of the quality control in retrospective analysis of computerized pressure flow data was carried out and compared with the manual results. The objective was to evaluate the impact of various artifacts on the outcome of pressure flow analysis. Methods A total of 582 pressure flow traces were included in the comparative analysis. For each trace, values of maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) and detrusor pressure at Qmax (P det.Qmax ) were read from manually smoothed and corrected uroflow curve and detrusor pressure curve respectively. Obstruction coefficient (OCO) was used to detect urethral resistance. ICS nomograms were employed to classify and diagnose obstruction, and Schfer nomograms to grade the obstruction. The results obtained by manual readings were compared with those of computerized readings. The difference was tested by statistic analyses. Results After manual correction, Qmax had a consistently significant decrease ( P 0.05). OCO underwent a systematically significant increase, with a mean of 0.067 ( P