Introduction. Uroflowmetry is widely used as a non-invasive screening tool for the assessment of lower urinary tract function and represents an integral component of the urodynamic evaluation pathway. Despite its broad clinical application, uroflowmetry is highly sensitive to voiding conditions and patient-related factors, many of which remain insufficiently controlled during routine examinations. Variability in voiding conditions may substantially affect uroflowmetry parameters and compromise the interpretability of recorded flow patterns. Moreover, standard uroflowmetry does not sufficiently consider patient comfort or device usability, both of which may influence voiding behavior and, consequently, the resulting uroflowmetry curves. Optimization and control of these factors may improve the diagnostic quality of uroflowmetry and enhance patient compliance with the procedure.
Aim. The aim of this study was to compare procedural efficiency and patient-reported satisfaction between an autonomous uroflowmetry system and conventional uroflowmetry.
Materials and methods. The prospective study was conducted in a cohort of 200 patients undergoing urological evaluation, including 100 men and 100 women. All participants sequentially underwent conventional uroflowmetry followed by uroflowmetry using an autonomous, patient-operated system within the same diagnostic pathway. The autonomous uroflowmetry device was designed in a familiar form factor, adapted to anatomical characteristics and natural voiding posture, allowing independent use with minimal involvement of medical staff. No changes were made to standard uroflowmetry in¬terpretation criteria. Primary outcome measures included the time required to prepare the equipment for each examination and patient-reported satisfaction with the procedure. Satisfaction was assessed using a structured questionnaire specifically developed for uroflowmetry assessment. In addition, the presence of technically inadequate recordings and measurement artifacts was documented. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive methods.
Results. Use of the autonomous uroflowmetry technique was associated with a reduction in equipment preparation time for both male and female patients. Among male patients, preparation time decreased.
Patient satisfaction, as assessed by the uroflowmetry questionnaire, was consistently higher with the autonomous method compared to conventional uroflowmetry. The mean total satisfaction score in men increased. In addition, a marked reduction in the prevalence of measurement artifacts was observed, decreasing from 23% during standard uroflowmetry to 0% when the autonomous technique was applied.
Conclusion. Autonomous uroflowmetry represents a practical alternative to conventional uroflowmetry by improving procedural efficiency, increasing patient satisfaction, and reducing the prevalence of measurement artifacts. Integration of patient-operated uroflowmetry systems into routine uro¬dynamic practice may contribute to improved quality and reliability of uroflowmetry recordings in clinical practice.
