I E Nygaard1, J H Lemke. 1. Department of Preventive Medicine and Environmental Health, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence, incidence, and remission rates of urinary incontinence in a large group of older women over a 6-year time span and to assess factors associated with incontinence incidence and remission. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Two rural counties in Iowa. PARTICIPANTS: 2025 women aged 65 years or older residing in rural Iowa, enrolled in the Iowa 65+ Rural Health Study of EPESE (Establishment of Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly) were interviewed in person annually for 6 years; specific responses to queries about urinary incontinence were given at baseline, 3-, and 6-year intervals. MEASUREMENTS: Conditional multivariate logistic regression analysis was done to assess the relationship between incontinence symptoms and various factors previously found to be related to incontinence. RESULTS: The baseline prevalence of urge incontinence was 36.3%, and of stress incontinence it was 40.3%. For urge incontinence, the 3-year incidence and remission rates between the third and sixth years were 28.5% and 22.1%, respectively. For stress incontinence, the 3-year incidence and remission rates between years 3 and 6 were 28.6% and 25.1%, respectively. Seventy-six percent and 84% of women who reported no urge or stress incontinence, respectively, at the baseline interview were continent at both follow-up interviews. The only significant factors related to changes in incontinence status were age, which was associated with an increased incidence of urge incontinence (OR 1.11, P = .017, 95% CI 1.019-1.203), and improvement in activities of daily living, which was associated with a increased remission of urge incontinence (OR 0.50, P = .015, 95% CI 0.28-0.9) CONCLUSION: In some older women, urinary incontinence is a dynamic state, with women moving back and forth along a continuum between continence and incontinence. These results are tempered by limitations of the study, which include its questionnaire design and lack of ability to detect potential treatment effect.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence, incidence, and remission rates of urinary incontinence in a large group of older women over a 6-year time span and to assess factors associated with incontinence incidence and remission. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Two rural counties in Iowa. PARTICIPANTS: 2025 women aged 65 years or older residing in rural Iowa, enrolled in the Iowa 65+ Rural Health Study of EPESE (Establishment of Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly) were interviewed in person annually for 6 years; specific responses to queries about urinary incontinence were given at baseline, 3-, and 6-year intervals. MEASUREMENTS: Conditional multivariate logistic regression analysis was done to assess the relationship between incontinence symptoms and various factors previously found to be related to incontinence. RESULTS: The baseline prevalence of urge incontinence was 36.3%, and of stress incontinence it was 40.3%. For urge incontinence, the 3-year incidence and remission rates between the third and sixth years were 28.5% and 22.1%, respectively. For stress incontinence, the 3-year incidence and remission rates between years 3 and 6 were 28.6% and 25.1%, respectively. Seventy-six percent and 84% of women who reported no urge or stress incontinence, respectively, at the baseline interview were continent at both follow-up interviews. The only significant factors related to changes in incontinence status were age, which was associated with an increased incidence of urge incontinence (OR 1.11, P = .017, 95% CI 1.019-1.203), and improvement in activities of daily living, which was associated with a increased remission of urge incontinence (OR 0.50, P = .015, 95% CI 0.28-0.9) CONCLUSION: In some older women, urinary incontinence is a dynamic state, with women moving back and forth along a continuum between continence and incontinence. These results are tempered by limitations of the study, which include its questionnaire design and lack of ability to detect potential treatment effect.
Authors: David H Thom; Jeanette S Brown; Michael Schembri; Arona I Ragins; Leslee L Subak; Stephen K Van Den Eeden Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Catherine Bresee; Emily D Dubina; Aqsa A Khan; Claudia Sevilla; David Grant; Karyn S Eilber; Jennifer T Anger Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2014 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Kaitlin A Hagan; Elisabeth Erekson; Andrea Austin; Vatche A Minassian; Mary K Townsend; Julie P W Bynum; Francine Grodstein Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Vatché A Minassian; Xiaowei S Yan; Haiyan Sun; Raissa O Platte; Walter F Stewart Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Patricia S Goode; Kathryn L Burgio; David T Redden; Alayne Markland; Holly E Richter; Patricia Sawyer; Richard M Allman Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Dee E Fenner; Elisa R Trowbridge; Divya A Patel; Divya L Patel; Nancy H Fultz; Janis M Miller; Denise Howard; John O L DeLancey Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 7.450