PTOTNarrative ReviewJournal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine2020

Urologic guidelines for the care and management of people with spina bifida.

David B Joseph, Michelle A Baum, Stacy T Tanaka and 6 others

PMID 33252091

WHAT IT FOUND

Expert consensus suggests a specific schedule of ultrasounds, urodynamics and blood tests from birth through adulthood to protect kidney function.

These recommendations are not based on evidence from trials, so treat them as a starting point for discussion rather than a proven standard.

Key findings

01The guidelines were developed by expert consensus because no Level 1 clinical evidence exists to answer the key urologic questions.

02Serum creatinine is considered an unreliable measure of kidney function in non-ambulatory patients with spina bifida due to low muscle mass.

03The guidelines recommend a schedule of surveillance that includes baseline ultrasound and urodynamics within three months of birth, followed by yearly ultrasounds in stable children.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The recommendations are based entirely on expert opinion and consensus, not on data from clinical trials or observational studies. The authors explicitly state these guidelines are not a 'standard of care' and that direction on treatment interventions is lacking. There is no consensus on the best way to measure kidney function in this population, making it hard to judge if surveillance tests are accurate.

Declared interests

The paper notes that the guidelines were developed by the Spina Bifida Association and supported by U.S. Government Public Health Service funding. It does not list specific financial conflicts of interest for individual authors.

The easy way to misread this

Do not treat these recommendations as proven effective interventions. The authors state there is no Level 1 evidence to support them, and they are explicitly not a standard of care. They are a consensus-based framework for monitoring, not a guarantee that following them prevents kidney damage.

Read it on PubMed →