Literature DB >> 14616456

The impact on health-related quality of life of stress, urge and mixed urinary incontinence.

K S Coyne1, Z Zhou, C Thompson, E Versi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of each type of urinary incontinence (stress, urge, and mixed) on health-related quality of life (HRQL). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The USA National Overactive Bladder Evaluation (NOBLE) programme of prevalence was used to identify respondents with incontinence based upon telephone survey responses. A nested case-control study was then conducted on respondents with symptoms of an overactive bladder (OAB), and on age and gender-matched controls; this consisted of the respondents completing a series of questionnaires, including the OAB-q (an HRQL scale for OAB), the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short-Form-36 (SF-36), the MOS Sleep Scale, and the Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale. Respondents were categorized into subgroups according to the primary cause of urine loss, i.e. sudden/uncomfortable urge to urinate (urge, UI), physical pressure (stress, SI), or both (mixed, MI). Descriptive analyses, t-tests and analysis of variance with post hoc comparisons were used.
RESULTS: Of the 919 participants in the nested case-control study, 171 reported incontinence, i.e. UI (69), SI (62) and MI (40). Among this cohort, 82.5% were female, 85.4% were Caucasian and the population had a mean age of 55.9 years. All OAB-q subscale scores were significantly (P < 0.01) worse among those with MI than with SI. Respondents with UI reported significantly higher levels of symptom bother and lower sleep scores (both P < 0.001) than those with SI. There were no differences in HRQL between the MI and UI groups. Voiding frequency and nocturia episodes did not differ among the groups but compared with the SI group, both UI and MI groups reported significantly higher ratings of urinary urge intensity (P < 0.001) and rated their need for medical care significantly higher (P < 0.01). The MI group reported more incontinence episodes (P = 0.02) than the SI group.
CONCLUSION: Compared with SI, respondents with UI and MI reported not only significantly greater ratings of urinary urge intensity and more incontinence episodes, but also significantly worse HRQL. These results are consistent with previous findings which indicated a greater impact on HRQL for the urge component of MI than for the stress component.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14616456     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04463.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  82 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacological management of women with mixed urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Hashim Hashim; Paul Abrams
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  Which women develop urgency or urgency urinary incontinence following midurethral slings?

Authors:  Joseph K-S Lee; Peter L Dwyer; Anna Rosamilia; Yik N Lim; Alexander Polyakov; Kobi Stav
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 3.  Slings in surgery of genuine stress incontinence.

Authors:  Silvia Secco; Alessandro Crestani; Francesco Cattaneo; Vincenzo Ficarra; Filiberto Zattoni; Giacomo Novara
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-10-15       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  A systematic review of patient-reported outcome instruments measuring sleep dysfunction in adults.

Authors:  Emily Beth Devine; Zafar Hakim; Jesse Green
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Quality of life in women with stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Sharon L Tennstedt; Mary Pat Fitzgerald; Charles W Nager; Yan Xu; Philippe Zimmern; Stephen Kraus; Patricia S Goode; John W Kusek; Diane Borello-France; Veronica Mallett
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-10-12

6.  Reductions in overactive bladder-related incontinence from pooled analysis of phase III trials evaluating treatment with solifenacin.

Authors:  Linda Cardozo; David Castro-Diaz; Marc Gittelman; Arwin Ridder; Moses Huang
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-04-20

7.  Prevalence of urinary incontinence in Korean women:an epidemiologic survey.

Authors:  Myung-Soo Choo; Ja Hyeon Ku; Seung-June Oh; Kyu-Sung Lee; Jae-Seung Paick; Ju Tae Seo; Duk Yoon Kim; Jeong Ju Lee; Jeong Gu Lee; Yong Gil Na; Dong Deuk Kwon; Won-Hee Park
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-02-15

8.  The physical finding of stress urinary incontinence among African women in Ghana.

Authors:  Richard M K Adanu; John O L De Lancey; Janis M Miller; Abena Asante
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-02-21

Review 9.  Mixed urinary incontinence: international urogynecological association research and development committee opinion.

Authors:  Dorothy Kammerer-Doak; Diaa E E Rizk; Olanrewaju Sorinola; Wael Agur; Sharif Ismail; Tony Bazi
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  [Prevalence of urinary incontinence in the German population].

Authors:  M E Beutel; A Hessel; R Schwarz; E Brähler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.