The reliability and validity of digital rectal examination in males
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Determining the validity and inter-rater reliability of Digital Rectal Examination for the assessment of pelvic floor muscle strength in males
IRAS ID
222247
Contact name
Mark Dunford
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
R&D Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 3 months, 21 days
Research summary
Summary of Research:
The study will validate and test the reliability of digital rectal pelvic floor assessment in males. This topic has been extensively researched in females through vaginal and anorectal palpation but there is limited work for digital rectal examination in males. The outcome may provide a reliable and valid tool for clinicians quantifying pelvic floor assessment in men. A series of measurements will be taken by two examiners who will not know the results of each others scores. Measurements of anal muscle squeeze pressure will be taken using both Modified Oxford Grading Score (MOS) and anal muscle testing using a machine by both examiners. Further measures of these muscles will be taken by both examiners to see if they agree with each other using MOS alone. Results will see how well clinicians agree and if the tests measure what it should be measuring. This, novel study, will involve only male patients as this has not previous been investigated.Summary of Results:
This study aimed to validate and test the reliability of digital rectal pelvic floor assessment in males. This topic has been extensively researched in females through vaginal and anorectal palpation but there is limited evidence of such work for digital rectal examination in males. It was thought that the outcome may provide a reliable and valid tool for clinicians quantifying pelvic floor assessment in men.
Subjects were recruited from men’s health clinics and from consultant led clinics with their permission within Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, South Wales. A series of measurements were taken by two blinded examiners using digital rectal examination and a single blinded examiner tested the pelvic floor using a pressure measurement to provide measurements. Measurements of anal sphincter squeeze pressure were taken using both Modified Oxford Grading Score and anal pressure measure. Results were analysed to determine reliability and correlations between measurements. The results showed that there was a close correlation between Modified Oxford Grading Score using Digital rectal examination and anal pressure measure in both examiners giving some evidence of validity against the ‘gold standard’. Therefore, it may be assumed that MOS using DRE is reproducible between examiners for this patient population. This study provides a platform for further research in the clinical area.REC name
Wales REC 6
REC reference
17/WA/0273
Date of REC Opinion
29 Sep 2017
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion