Premium
Is there an alternative to pad tests? Correlation of subjective variables of severity of urinary loss to the 1‐h pad test in women with stress urinary incontinence
Author(s) -
Franco Anna Virginia M.,
Lee Frank,
Fynes Michelle M.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2008.07612.x
Subject(s) - medicine , urinary incontinence , distress , quality of life (healthcare) , visual analogue scale , genitourinary system , stress incontinence , physical therapy , grading scale , grading (engineering) , urology , surgery , clinical psychology , nursing , civil engineering , engineering
OBJECTIVE To compare the 1‐h pad test in women who have urodynamically confirmed stress incontinence (USI) with a patient‐based 3‐point symptom severity scale and validated quality of life (QoL) questionnaires. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 98 women with USI were prospectively recruited; all had a 1‐h pad test and completed the validated disease‐specific QoL questionnaires, including short forms of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ‐SF), Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI‐6), and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ‐7). In addition, the severity of incontinence was determined using the Stamey grading scale, a visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and a patient‐based 3‐point symptom severity scale. RESULTS The VAS, symptom severity scale, Stamey grade, UDI‐6, and IIQ‐7 failed to correlate significantly with the 1‐h pad test. Only the ICIQ‐SF correlated significantly with this test. CONCLUSION The ICIQ‐SF is easy to administer and, in this study, correlated best with the 1‐h pad test in women with pure primary or secondary USI. It incorporates both symptom severity and QoL variables. We recommend its routine use in clinical practice.