Literature DB >> 26573810

The bother of anal incontinence and St. Mark's Incontinence Score.

C Paka1,2, I K Atan1,3, H P Dietz4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient self-report is important in the assessment of the impact of anal incontinence (AI) on quality of life. This study aimed to (1) determine the correlation between total St. Mark's Incontinence Score (SMIS) and a single-item visual analogue scale (VAS) for bother from AI, and (2) determine the correlation between individual components of SMIS and VAS.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted on a cohort of 516 women seen for symptoms of lower urinary tract and pelvic floor dysfunction between January 2013 and August 2014. If a woman responded "yes" to the question "Do you experience any leakage from the back passage/anus?" they were considered to have AI, and the SMIS was administered. They were also asked "How much are you bothered by these symptoms?" to assess bother from AI by VAS. Statistical analyses were performed using Spearman's correlation and Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: Eighty-four (16.3 %) women reported AI with a mean SMIS of 11 (SD ± 5.11, range 2-24) and median bother of 5 (VAS 1-10). There was a fair correlation between VAS for the bother from AI and SMIS (Spearman's r = 0.523, p < 0.001). Fecal urgency, impact on lifestyle, and use of pad/plug were significantly associated with VAS (p = 0.05, p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: There is a fair, positive correlation between VAS for bother from AI and SMIS. Patients' bother from AI is strongly associated with its impact on lifestyle as quantified by individual SMIS components.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anal incontinence; Fecal incontinence; St. Mark’s Incontinence Score; Visual analogue scale

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26573810     DOI: 10.1007/s10151-015-1397-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tech Coloproctol        ISSN: 1123-6337            Impact factor:   3.781


  40 in total

1.  Prevalence and burden of fecal incontinence: a population-based study in women.

Authors:  Adil E Bharucha; Alan R Zinsmeister; G Richard Locke; Barbara M Seide; Kimberly McKeon; Cathy D Schleck; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 22.682

2.  Fecal incontinence in US women: a population-based study.

Authors:  Jennifer L Melville; Ming-Yu Fan; Katherine Newton; Dee Fenner
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  St. Mark's incontinence score for assessment of anal incontinence following obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS).

Authors:  Anne-Marie Roos; Abdul H Sultan; Ranee Thakar
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2008-12-12

4.  Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems.

Authors:  C J Vaizey; E Carapeti; J A Cahill; M A Kamm
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 5.  Current status: new technologies for the treatment of patients with fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Andreas M Kaiser; Guy R Orangio; Massarat Zutshi; Suraj Alva; Tracy L Hull; Peter W Marcello; David A Margolin; Janice F Rafferty; W Donald Buie; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-03-08       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Fecal incontinence in primary care: prevalence, diagnosis, and health care utilization.

Authors:  Gena C Dunivan; Steve Heymen; Olafur S Palsson; Michael von Korff; Marsha J Turner; Jennifer L Melville; William E Whitehead
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Utility preference score measurement in women with fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Heidi S Harvie; Lily A Arya; Emily K Saks; Mary D Sammel; J Sanford Schwartz; Judy A Shea
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Factors associated with symptom severity in women presenting with fecal incontinence.

Authors:  S B Menees; T M Smith; X Xu; W D Chey; R J Saad; D E Fenner
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  Epidemiology of fecal incontinence: the silent affliction.

Authors:  J F Johanson; J Lafferty
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 10.864

10.  Fecal incontinence in US adults: epidemiology and risk factors.

Authors:  William E Whitehead; Lori Borrud; Patricia S Goode; Susan Meikle; Elizabeth R Mueller; Ashok Tuteja; Alison Weidner; Milena Weinstein; Wen Ye
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2009-05-04       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  6 in total

1.  Fecal incontinence: major problem or incidental finding?

Authors:  J M Devesa
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  Does flatus incontinence matter?

Authors:  Laura Cattani; Moshe Gillor; Hans Peter Dietz
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Further content validation of the 18-item NCCN/FACT Ovarian Symptom Index and its Disease Related Symptom-Physical (DRS-P) subscale for use in advanced ovarian cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Sara Shaunfield; Sally Jensen; Allison P Fisher; Kimberly Webster; Shohreh Shahabi; Arijit Ganguli; David Cella
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 3.186

4.  Analysis of the efficacy of biofeedback for faecal incontinence after surgery for anorectal malformation.

Authors:  Zhenqiang Zhang; Yuan Cheng; Junjun Ju; Weichen Shen; Zhubin Pan; Yuliang Zhou
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 5.348

5.  Outcomes of primary anal sphincter repair after obstetric injury and evaluation of a novel three-choice assessment.

Authors:  K Kuismanen; K Nieminen; K Karjalainen; K Lehto; J Uotila
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Sacral nerve stimulation in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

Authors:  C Seifarth; N Slavova; C Degro; K S Lehmann; M E Kreis; B Weixler
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 2.571

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.