Comparison of a Paper and Automated Bladder Diary in Pediatric Patients
Primary Purpose
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Voiding Disorders, Enuresis
Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Belgium
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Minze Diary Pod
Paper bladder diary
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Pediatric patients presenting to the clinic and identified as requiring a bladder diary Age: 6 to 12 years Sex: male or female Child and/or parent own and are able to operate a smartphone and/or tablet Exclusion Criteria: Change in urologic treatment during the data collection period Inability to hold the Diary Pod while urinating Inability to speak, read and write Dutch
Sites / Locations
- UZARecruiting
- AZ VoorkempenRecruiting
- Imelda ZiekenhuisRecruiting
- Privé praktijk dr. Katrien KlockaertsRecruiting
- ZNA Koningin Paola KinderziekenhuisRecruiting
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Other
Other
Arm Label
Paper bladder diary (pBD)
Automated bladder diary (autoBD)
Arm Description
Patients will complete the paper bladder diary at home for at least 2 consecutive days.
Patients will complete the automated bladder diary (Minze Diary Pod) at home for at least 2 consecutive days.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Level of agreement average daytime volume (ml)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for average daytime volume (ml).
Secondary Outcome Measures
Level of agreement maximum voided volume (ml)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for maximum voided volume (ml).
Level of agreement 24h voided volume (ml)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for 24h voided volume (ml).
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume (ml)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume (ml).
Level of agreement average daytime volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for average daytime volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Level of agreement maximum voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for maximum voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus 24h voided volume (%)
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus 24h voided volume (%).
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus daytime voiding frequency
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus daytime voiding frequency.
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus nighttime voiding frequency
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus nighttime voiding frequency.
Patient compliance reported by patient
Subjective compliance will be assessed using topics such as completion, reliability, time to data entry, measuring accuracy, child involvement, child's and parents' motivation and interference with daily life.
Patient compliance reported by healthcare provided
Subjective compliance will be assessed using topics such as completion, measuring accuracy, quality, reliability and clinical usefulness
Patient satisfaction
Patient satisfaction will be assessed on usability, ergonomics, and diary preference.
Healthcare professional satisfaction
Healthcare professional satisfaction will be assessed on user experience related to setting up and interpreting the diaries and diary preference.
Healthcare professional satisfaction will be assessed on user experience related to setting up and interpreting the diaries and diary preference.
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT06070675
First Posted
September 18, 2023
Last Updated
October 1, 2023
Sponsor
Universiteit Antwerpen
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT06070675
Brief Title
Comparison of a Paper and Automated Bladder Diary in Pediatric Patients
Official Title
Comparison of a Paper and Automated Bladder Diary in Pediatric Patients
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
October 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
October 1, 2023 (Anticipated)
Primary Completion Date
September 1, 2025 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
January 1, 2026 (Anticipated)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Universiteit Antwerpen
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to compare an automated bladder diary (autoBD) to a paper bladder diary (pBD) on their level of agreement, patient compliance and satisfaction. It is a mixed methods, randomized 2x2 crossover trial. Pediatric patients (6 to 12 years) presenting to the clinic and identified as requiring a bladder diary will be recruited. Participants will be randomized either to group 1, where they complete the paper bladder diary (pBD) and then the automated bladder diary (autoBD), or to group 2, where they complete the autoBD and then the pBD. Both diaries are kept for at least 2 consecutive days with a wash-out period of 2 to 6 days between the two diaries. Mean differences and the level of agreement between the pBD and autoBD will be analysed using Bland Altman plots for key diary parameters.
After completion of each diary format, participants will complete a short online survey regarding compliance, satisfaction and their preference, if any. Finally, a selection of participants and their parents will be invited for an open-ended interview.
The participating healthcare professionals will be asked to score each pBD and autoBD on patient compliance when processing the diary. Furthermore, surveys and open-ended interviews will be conducted to assess their overall satisfaction of each diary type and their preference, if any.
Detailed Description
For some time now, patient compliance with paper bladder diaries is being questioned. Paper bladder diaries are often incomplete, unreliable and/or of low quality. Multiple electronic bladder diaries have been developed to overcome some of the limitations associated with paper bladder diaries. However, based on several comparison studies between paper and electronic bladder diaries, it is not clear whether an electronic format alone is truly superior to the paper format. The investigators want to introduce and evaluate the feasibility of a new type of bladder diary: an automated bladder diary. In contrast to an electronic diary, an automated diary automatically registers voiding data using a connected measuring device. An electronic diary simply eliminates the use of paper, but the patient still needs to measure the voided volumes with a urinary container and manually enter them in the electronic diary. The investigators believe an automated diary may lead to improved patient compliance by reducing the required efforts from the patient and instead provide guidance and prompts.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Voiding Disorders, Enuresis, Overactive Bladder
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Crossover Assignment
Model Description
Mixed methods, randomized 2x2 crossover trial
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
60 (Anticipated)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Paper bladder diary (pBD)
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
Patients will complete the paper bladder diary at home for at least 2 consecutive days.
Arm Title
Automated bladder diary (autoBD)
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
Patients will complete the automated bladder diary (Minze Diary Pod) at home for at least 2 consecutive days.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Minze Diary Pod
Intervention Description
The automated bladder diary utilized in this study consists of the Minze Diary Pod and Minze Flow app. The Diary Pod is a capacitance-based measuring device, that automatically registers voided volumes and time of void. The Diary Pod connects via Bluetooth to the Minze Flow app to request additional information from the patient, such as urge, drinks and leakages.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Paper bladder diary
Intervention Description
The paper bladder diary utilized in this study is a paper timetable that has the patient enter (in the columns of the timetable) drinks in ml, urinations in ml (using a measuring cup) and leakage episodes for the nearest hours (rows of the timetable).
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Level of agreement average daytime volume (ml)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for average daytime volume (ml).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Level of agreement maximum voided volume (ml)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for maximum voided volume (ml).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement 24h voided volume (ml)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for 24h voided volume (ml).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume (ml)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume (ml).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement average daytime volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for average daytime volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement maximum voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for maximum voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus age expected bladder capacity (%).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus 24h voided volume (%)
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus 24h voided volume (%).
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus daytime voiding frequency
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus daytime voiding frequency.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Level of agreement nighttime voided volume versus nighttime voiding frequency
Description
What are the mean differences and the limits of agreement between the pBD and autoBD for nighttime voided volume versus nighttime voiding frequency.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Patient compliance reported by patient
Description
Subjective compliance will be assessed using topics such as completion, reliability, time to data entry, measuring accuracy, child involvement, child's and parents' motivation and interference with daily life.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Patient compliance reported by healthcare provided
Description
Subjective compliance will be assessed using topics such as completion, measuring accuracy, quality, reliability and clinical usefulness
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Patient satisfaction
Description
Patient satisfaction will be assessed on usability, ergonomics, and diary preference.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
Title
Healthcare professional satisfaction
Description
Healthcare professional satisfaction will be assessed on user experience related to setting up and interpreting the diaries and diary preference.
Healthcare professional satisfaction will be assessed on user experience related to setting up and interpreting the diaries and diary preference.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 year
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
6 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
12 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Pediatric patients presenting to the clinic and identified as requiring a bladder diary
Age: 6 to 12 years
Sex: male or female
Child and/or parent own and are able to operate a smartphone and/or tablet
Exclusion Criteria:
Change in urologic treatment during the data collection period
Inability to hold the Diary Pod while urinating
Inability to speak, read and write Dutch
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Lola Bladt, MSc
Phone
497848014
Ext
+32
Email
lola.bladt@uantwerpen.be
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Gunter De Win, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
UZA/UAntwerpen
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
UZA
City
Edegem
State/Province
Antwerpen
ZIP/Postal Code
2650
Country
Belgium
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Gunter De Win
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Karen De Baets
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Tinne Van Aggelpoel
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Alexandra Vermandel
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Gunter De Win
Facility Name
AZ Voorkempen
City
Malle
State/Province
Antwerpen
ZIP/Postal Code
2390
Country
Belgium
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Karolien De Moerloose
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Karolien De Moerloose
Facility Name
Imelda Ziekenhuis
City
Bonheiden
State/Province
Antwerp
ZIP/Postal Code
2820
Country
Belgium
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Hendrik-Jan Florin
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Hendrik-Jan Florin
Facility Name
Privé praktijk dr. Katrien Klockaerts
City
Aalst
State/Province
Oost-Vlaanderen
ZIP/Postal Code
9300
Country
Belgium
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Katrien Klockaerts
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Katrien Klockaerts
Facility Name
ZNA Koningin Paola Kinderziekenhuis
City
Antwerpen
ZIP/Postal Code
2020
Country
Belgium
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
An Bael
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
An Bael
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Nathalie Segers
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Learn more about this trial
Comparison of a Paper and Automated Bladder Diary in Pediatric Patients
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs