These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [The diagnostic value of chosen questionnaires (UDI 6SF, Gaudenz, MESA, ICIQ-SF and King's Health Questionnaire) in diagnosis of different types of women's urinary incontinence].
    Author: Kieres P, Rokita W, Stanisławska M, Rechberger T, Gałezia M.
    Journal: Ginekol Pol; 2008 May; 79(5):338-41. PubMed ID: 18624108.
    Abstract:
    THE AIM: The assessment of the usefulness of the following questionnaires: UDI 6SF, King's Health Questionnaire, Gaudenz, MESA, ICIQ-SF in diagnosis of different types of women's urinary incontinence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 100 women who were hospitalized in the Department of Urology of St. Rafael Hospital in Czerwona Góra due to urinary incontinence. On the basis of the received data we have compared the data from questionnairies to the results of the urodynamic study. RESULTS: The mean age of women was 55.6 years. The stress urinary incontinence (SUI) was diagnosed in 32%, urgent urinary incontinence (UUI) in 10% and mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) in 55% of women, and neurogenic bladder in 3%. The data obtained from the study showed that questionnaires had 98% sensitivity and 50% specificity in diagnosing the type of urinary incontinence in women. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Data obtained from the questionnaires fails to offer enough information to make a certain diagnosis of urinary incontinence. 2. The questionnaires: ICIQ-SF, Gaudenz and MESA are effective in the diagnosis of mixed urinary incontinence. 3. In spite of their high sensitivity, the specificity of questionnaires in the diagnosis of urinary incontinence is rather low.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]