World journal of urology · 2009
The correlations of incontinence-related quality of life measures with symptom severity and pathophysiology in women with primary stress urinary incontinence.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huang Wen-Chen, Yang Shwu-Huey, Yang Shu-Yu, Yang Evelyn, Yang Jenn-Ming
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We sought to explore the correlations of incontinence-related quality of life (QoL) measures with the symptom severity and pathophysiological factors for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 707 women who had primary SUI. Clinical data for analysis included Ingelman-Sundberg scales, 1-h pad tests, incontinence-related QoL questionnaires comprising short forms of the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7), ultrasound assessment of urethral support and urethral sphincter function determined by maximum urethral closure pressure and Valsalva leak point pressure. The correlations of incontinence-related QoL, measured by UDI-6 and IIQ-7 questionnaires, with the independent variables such as Ingelman-Sundberg scales, 1-h pad tests, urethral support and urethral sphincter function were investigated.
RESULTS: The scores of item 3 of UDI-6 as well as the sum scores of UDI-6 and IIQ-7 had significant correlation with incontinence severity assessed by Ingelman-Sundberg scales and 1-h pad tests. However, only the scores of item 3 of UDI-6 were significantly correlated with the presence of bladder neck funneling on ultrasound and maximum urethral closure pressure. No correlations exist between sum scores of UDI-6 or IIQ-7 and the pathophysiological factors of SUI.
CONCLUSIONS: Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 and IIQ-7 play important and complementary roles in comprehensive assessment for SUI, but are not identical to the pathophysiological factors.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 707 women who had primary SUI. Clinical data for analysis included Ingelman-Sundberg scales, 1-h pad tests, incontinence-related QoL questionnaires comprising short forms of the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7), ultrasound assessment of urethral support and urethral sphincter function determined by maximum urethral closure pressure and Valsalva leak point pressure. The correlations of incontinence-related QoL, measured by UDI-6 and IIQ-7 questionnaires, with the independent variables such as Ingelman-Sundberg scales, 1-h pad tests, urethral support and urethral sphincter function were investigated.
RESULTS: The scores of item 3 of UDI-6 as well as the sum scores of UDI-6 and IIQ-7 had significant correlation with incontinence severity assessed by Ingelman-Sundberg scales and 1-h pad tests. However, only the scores of item 3 of UDI-6 were significantly correlated with the presence of bladder neck funneling on ultrasound and maximum urethral closure pressure. No correlations exist between sum scores of UDI-6 or IIQ-7 and the pathophysiological factors of SUI.
CONCLUSIONS: Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 and IIQ-7 play important and complementary roles in comprehensive assessment for SUI, but are not identical to the pathophysiological factors.