Do objective urodynamic or clinical findings determine impact of urinary incontinence or its treatment on quality of life?

Abstract

Objectives To correlate the clinical and urodynamic parameters with two measures of incontinence-specific quality of life (QOL), to describe the changes in those measures after treatment, and to explore the factors determining these changes. Methods A total of 82 incontinent women (mean age 52 years, range 28 to 80) underwent urodynamics testing and a 48-hour pad test. They also completed the frequency/volume chart, estimated the degree of bother from urinary incontinence using the visual analog scale (VAS), and completed a validated QOL instrument—the Urinary Incontinence Severity Score (UISS). Sixty-nine women were re-evaluated 13 months (range 6 to 21) after treatment. Results A greater degree of disability from urinary incontinence as measured by the VAS correlated with a lower maximal urethral closure pressure ( r = −0.29, P <0.01), greater detrusor pressure ( r = 0.30, P <0.05), and amount of urine leakage ( r = 0.46, P <0.001). The UISS correlated poorly with the urodynamic and frequency/volume chart findings. A greater amount of urine leakage was the best predictor of QOL impairment as measured by the UISS (beta 0.25; P = 0.034). The change in urine leakage best predicted the change in the UISS (beta 0.30; P = 0.024) and the change in the VAS (beta 0.48; P = 0.001). Conclusions The response to the question “How bothered are you by incontinence at this moment?” best reflects the severity of urinary incontinence measured objectively. Urodynamic parameters correlated poorly with incontinence-specific QOL measure. Of the clinical objective measures of the severity of urinary incontinence, the amount of leakage in the pad test was the best, although modest, predictor of QOL impairment. The change in urine leakage best predicted the change in QOL scores and VAS 1 year after beginning treatment.