Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A review of quality-of-life questionnaires for urinary incontinence and overactive bladder: Which ones to use and why?

  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Overactive bladder (OAB) and stress urinary incontinence have a profound impact on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQL). The purpose of this article is to identify and describe condition-specific HRQL measures validated among patients with symptoms of OAB or stress urinary incontinence. A Medline literature search was performed to identify published articles or abstracts focusing on the development and psychometric validation of relevant instruments. Target populations and psychometric properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness to change) of 16 questionnaires are reviewed. A range of well-validated, condition-specific HRQL measures are available. Recommendations are provided regarding which measures to use in different situations. When choosing among instruments, psychometric evidence and the match of an instrument to the study population should be considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Abrams P, Kelleher CJ, Kerr LA, Rogers RG: Overactive bladder significantly affects quality of life. Am J Manage Care 2000, 6(suppl 11):S580-S590.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al.: The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardization Subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002, 21:167–178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Milsom I, Abrams P, Cardozo L, et al.: How widespread are the symptoms of an overactive bladder and how are they managed? A population-based prevalence study. BJU Int 2001, 87:760–766.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stewart WF, Van Rooyen JB, Cundiff GW, et al.: Prevalence and burden of overactive bladder in the United States. World J Urol 2003, 20:327–336.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Minassian VA, Drutz HP, Al-Badr A: Urinary incontinence as a worldwide problem. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003, 82:327–338.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Boyle P, Robertson C, Mazzetta C, et al.: The prevalence of male urinary incontinence in four centres: the UREPIK study. BJU Int 2003, 92:943–947.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Leidy NK, Revicki DA, Geneste B: Recommendations for evaluating the validity of quality-of-life claims for labeling and promotion. Value Health 1999, 2:113–127.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Patrick DL, Chiang YP: Measurement of health outcomes in treatment effectiveness evaluations: conceptual and methodological challenges. Med Care 2000, 38(suppl 9):II14-II25.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dugan E, Cohen SJ, Robinson D, et al.: The quality of life of older adults with urinary incontinence: determining generic and condition-specific predictors. Qual Life Res 1998, 7:337–344.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL: Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993, 118:622–629.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Symonds T: A review of condition-specific instruments to assess the impact of urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life. Eur Urol 2003, 43:219–225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Amarenco G, Arnould B, Carita P, et al.: European psychometric validation of the CONTILIFE: a quality-of-life questionnaire for urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2003, 43:391–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jeffry L, Deval B, Birsan A, et al.: Objective and subjective cure rates after tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of urinary incontinence. Urology 2001, 58:702–706.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Khullar V, Salvatore S: A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinent women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997, 104:1374–1379.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Badia Llach X, Castro Diaz D, Conejero Sugranes J: [Validity of the Kings Health questionnaire in the assessment of quality of life of patients with urinary incontinence. The Kings Group]. Med Clin (Barc) 2000, 114:647–652.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kobelt G, Kirchberger I, Malone-Lee J: Review: quality-of-life aspects of the overactive bladder and the effect of treatment with tolterodine. BJU Int 1999, 83:583–590.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Okamura K, Usami T, Nagahama K, et al.: “Quality of life” assessment of urination in elderly Japanese men and women with some medical problems using International Prostate Symptom Score and King’s Health Questionnaire. Eur Urol 2002, 41:411–419.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Reese PR, Pleil AM, Okano GJ, Kelleher CJ: Multinational study of reliability and validity of the King’s Health Questionnaire in patients with overactive bladder. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:427–442. This article presents a detailed psychometric validation of the KHQ, a measure that has been validated and widely used among diverse patient populations.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tamanini JT, D’Ancona CA, Botega NJ, Rodrigues Netto N, Jr: [Validation of the Portuguese version of the King’s Health Questionnaire for urinary incontinent women]. Rev Saude Publica 2003, 37:203–211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Uemura S, Homma Y: Reliability and validity of King’s Health Questionnaire in patients with symptoms of overactive bladder with urge incontinence in Japan. Neurourol Urodyn 2004, 23:94–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Conway K, Uzun V, Marrel A, et al.: Linguistic validation of the Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) in eight languages. Value Health 1999, 2:204.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kelleher CJ, Kreder KJ, Pleil AM, et al.: Long-term healthrelated quality of life of patients receiving extended-release tolterodine for overactive bladder. Am J Manag Care 2002, 8(suppl 19):S616-S630.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kelleher CJ, Reese PR, Pleil AM, Okano GJ: Health-related quality of life of patients receiving extended-release tolterodine for overactive bladder. Am J Manag Care 2002, 8(suppl 19):S608-S615.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Coyne K, Revicki D, Hunt T, et al.: Psychometric validation of an overactive bladder symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire: the OAB-q. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:563–574.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Coyne KS, Matza LS, Thompson C: The responsiveness of the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q). Qual Life Res 2004, in press.

  26. Coyne KS, Zhou Z, Bhattacharyya SK, et al.: The prevalence of nocturia and its effect on health-related quality of life and sleep in a community sample in the USA. BJU Int 2003, 92:948–954.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Coyne KS, Zhou Z, Thompson C, Versi E: The impact on health-related quality of life of stress, urge, and mixed urinary incontinence. BJU Int 2003, 92:731–735. This comparison among stress, urge, and mixed UI highlights the differences in HRQL impact by incontinence type using the OAB-q, the only instrument specifically developed for continent and incontinent OAB patients. Results emphasize the need to select an instrument that fits the specific condition.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Shumaker SA, Wyman JF, Uebersax JS, et al.: Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program in Women (CPW) Research Group. Qual Life Res 1994, 3:291–306.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Harvey MA, Kristjansson B, Griffith D, Versi E: The Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory: a revisit of their validity in women without a urodynamic diagnosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001, 185:25–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. van der Vaart CH, de Leeuw JR, Roovers JP, Heintz AP: The effect of urinary incontinence and overactive bladder symptoms on quality of life in young women. BJU Int 2002, 90:544–549.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Robinson D, Pearce KF, Preisser JS, et al.: Relationship between patient reports of urinary incontinence symptoms and quality of life measures. Obstet Gynecol 1998, 91:224–228.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Uebersax JS, Wyman JF, Shumaker SA, et al.: Short forms to assess life quality and symptom distress for urinary incontinence in women: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program for Women Research Group. Neurourol Urodyn 1995, 14:131–139.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Robinson JP, Shea JA: Development and testing of a measure of health-related quality of life for men with urinary incontinence. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002, 50:935–945.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Patrick DL, Martin ML, Bushnell DM, et al.: Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I-QOL). Urology 1999, 53:71–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Wagner TH, Patrick DL, Bavendam TG, et al.: Quality of life of persons with urinary incontinence: development of a new measure. Urology 1996, 47:67–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Bump RC, Norton PA, Zinner NR, Yalcin I: Mixed urinary incontinence symptoms: urodynamic findings, incontinence severity, and treatment response. Obstet Gynecol 2003, 102:76–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Melville JL, Miller EA, Fialkow MF, et al.: Relationship between patient report and physician assessment of urinary incontinence severity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003, 189:76–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yalcin I, Bump RC: Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003, 189:98–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yu LC, Kaltreider DL, Hu T, et al.: The ISQ-P tool: measuring stress associated with incontinence. J Gerontol Nurs 1989, 15:9–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Komatsu H, Kojima M, Suzuki K, et al.: [Development of a questionnaire to measure the effect of urinary incontinence on female sexuality: a reliability and validity study]. Kango Kenkyu 1996, 29:386–398.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Marquis P, Amarenco G, Sapede C, et al.: Development and validation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for urinary urge incontinency. Qual Life Res 1995, 4:458–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Black N, Griffiths J, Pope C: Development of a symptom severity index and a symptom impact index for stress incontinence in women. Neurourol Urodyn 1996, 15:630–640.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Chen GD, Lin TL, Hu SW, et al.: Prevalence and correlation of urinary incontinence and overactive bladder in Taiwanese women. Neurourol Urodyn 2003, 22:109–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Stach-Lempinen B, Kujansuu E, Laippala P, Metsanoja R: Visual analogue scale, urinary incontinence severity score, and 15 D-psychometric testing of three different health-related quality-of-life instruments for urinary incontinent women. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2001, 35:476–483.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. DuBeau CE, Kiely DK, Resnick NM: Quality-of-life impact of urge incontinence in older persons: a new measure and conceptual structure. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999, 47:989–994.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Brown JS, Posner SF, Stewart AL: Urge incontinence: new health-related quality-of-life measures. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999, 47:980–988.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Lubeck DP, Prebil LA, Peeples P, Brown JS: A health-related quality-of-life measure for use in patients with urge urinary incontinence: a validation study. Qual Life Res 1999, 8:337–344.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Rai GS, Kiniors M, Wientjes H: Urinary incontinence handicap inventory. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 1994, 19:7–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Lee PS, Reid DW, Saltmarche A, Linton L: Measuring the psychosocial impact of urinary incontinence: the York Incontinence Perceptions Scale (YIPS). J Am Geriatr Soc 1995, 43:1275–1278.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Hunskaar S, Vinsnes A: The quality of life in women with urinary incontinence as measured by the sickness impact profile. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991, 39:378–382.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MEDTAP International, Inc., 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 600, 20814, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Louis S. Matza PhD

  2. Pfizer, Inc., 235 East 42nd Street, 10017, New York, NY, USA

    Teresa M. Zyczynski PharmD & Tamara Bavendam MD

Authors
  1. Louis S. Matza PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teresa M. Zyczynski PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tamara Bavendam MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Matza, L.S., Zyczynski, T.M. & Bavendam, T. A review of quality-of-life questionnaires for urinary incontinence and overactive bladder: Which ones to use and why?. Curr Urol Rep 5, 336–342 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-004-0079-6

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-004-0079-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation