Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Dec;22(12):1565-71.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-011-1503-3. Epub 2011 Jul 28.

Urinary incontinence self-report questions: reproducibility and agreement with bladder diary

Catherine S Bradley  1 , Jeanette S Brown, Stephen K Van Den Eeden, Michael Schembri, Arona Ragins, David H Thom
Affiliations

Urinary incontinence self-report questions: reproducibility and agreement with bladder diary

Catherine S Bradley et al. Int Urogynecol J. 2011 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: This study aims to measure self-report urinary incontinence questions' reproducibility and agreement with bladder diary.

Methods: Data were analyzed from the Reproductive Risk of Incontinence Study at Kaiser. Participating women reporting at least weekly incontinence completed self-report incontinence questions and a 7-day bladder diary. Self-report question reproducibility was assessed and agreement between self-reported and diary-recorded voiding and incontinence frequency was measured. Test characteristics and area under the curve were calculated for self-reported incontinence types using diary as the gold standard.

Results: Five hundred ninety-one women were included and 425 completed a diary. The self-report questions had moderate reproducibility and self-reported and diary-recorded incontinence and voiding frequencies had moderate to good agreement. Self-reported incontinence types identified stress and urgency incontinence more accurately than mixed incontinence.

Conclusions: Self-report incontinence questions have moderate reproducibility and agreement with diary, and considering their minimal burden, are acceptable research tools in epidemiologic studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: M Schembri, A Ragins, and DH Thom have nothing to disclose.

References

    1. Landefeld CS, Bowers BJ, Feld AD, et al. National Institutes of Health state-of-the-science conference statement: prevention of fecal and urinary incontinence in adults. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:449–458. - PubMed
    1. Assessment and treatment of urinary incontinence. Scientific Committee of the First International Consultation on Incontinence. Lancet. 2000;355:2153–8. - PubMed
    1. Fantl JA, Newman DK, Colling J, et al. Urinary incontinence in adults: acute and chronic management Clinical Practice Guideline no 2. US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; Rockville, MD: 1996.
    1. Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S. A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence: the Norwegian EPINCONT study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trondelag. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1150–1157. - PubMed
    1. Thom DH, van den Eeden SK, Ragins AI, et al. Differences in prevalence of urinary incontinence by race/ethnicity. J Urol. 2006;175:259–264. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types