The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on changes in antimicrobial prophylaxis and development of genito-urinary tract infections after urodynamic study: A retrospective comparative study of a single rehabilitation hospital in Japan.

AIMS: To investigate the changes in the proportion of antimicrobial prophylaxis (AP) during the urodynamic study (UDS) and the frequency of posttest genito-urinary tract infections (GUTI) before and after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and evaluate this associations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent UDS between 2015 and 2021 were targeted, and they were allocated to pre-2020 as before the appearance of COVID-19 and post-2020 as after that, and propensity score matching was performed. The impact on AP was assessed by the administration rate, and that on the development of febrile GUTI after UDS was assessed for an equivalence by the GUTI-free rate at 7 days after testing. RESULTS: After matching, 384 cases of 192 cases each were included. The frequency of AP was 58.3% in pre-2020 and 77.1% in post-2020, an increase of about 19%, and the rate increased significantly in post-2020 (p < 0.001). However, the incidence of GUTI after UDS was 4.2% and 4.7%, respectively, with no significant difference. The ratio of GUTI-free rates was within the equivalence margin, confirming an equivalence before and after the appearance of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Under the influence of COVID-19 pandemic, even though AP rate during UDS was increased by 19% from that brought by following the guideline-based administration methods, the frequency of GUTI after UDS was similar, so it is thought to be important to use AP during UDS appropriately for high-risk cases as recommended in the guidelines.

Safe urodynamic practices in times of COVID-19: What can be accomplished and what can be added?

AIM: To present feedback, after applying national and international urodynamic study (UDS) recommendations for safe practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We created a checklist to assess the feasibility of performing UDS recommendations for safe practice during the COVID-19 pandemic from the first week of May 2021 to the last week of July 2021. RESULTS: One hundred patients were analyzed during the study period. We observed that all preventive recommendations for the steps that precede UDS could be followed in full. However, some guidelines for performing the exam were not feasible in all patients. We have successfully adopted other safety measures for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic will likely persist for several more years. We believe that continuous improvement, revision, and updating of existing protocols and guidelines for the safe practice of UDS in times of COVID-19, as we propose in this study, should be encouraged.