Global ratings of patient satisfaction and perceptions of improvement with treatment for urinary incontinence: Validation of three global patient ratings

Birmingham/Atlanta Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama 35233, USA.
Neurourology and Urodynamics (Impact Factor: 2.87). 01/2006; 25(5):411-7. DOI: 10.1002/nau.20243
Source: PubMed


To test the validity of three patient global ratings, satisfaction, perception of improvement, and estimated percent improvement, for measuring outcomes of behavioral treatment for urinary incontinence.
This report is a secondary analysis of data from three randomized controlled trials testing behavioral interventions for incontinence. Participants were 359 community-dwelling women, aged 40-92 years, with stress, urge, or mixed urinary incontinence. All participants received an 8-week program of clinic-based or self-administered behavioral training. Subjective outcomes included a patient satisfaction question (PSQ), global perception of improvement (GPI), and estimated percent improvement (EPI). Convergent validity was tested by examining the relationship between each measure and reduction of incontinence (bladder diary), change on the incontinence impact questionnaire (IIQ), and desire for another treatment. Discriminant validity was explored by examining the relationship of the global ratings to five measures not expected to be related to outcome (age, race, BMI, education level, and change in perceived pain).
All three patient global ratings were significantly associated with each other (P < 0.0001), with diary measures of reduction of incontinence episodes (P < 0.0001), and change in the IIQ (P < 0.005), and inversely associated with desire for another treatment (P < 0.0001). All three patient ratings were not significantly associated with age, race, BMI, education level, or change in perceived pain.
Patient global ratings of satisfaction, perception of improvement, and estimated percent improvement have acceptable convergent and discriminant validity for measuring outcomes in studies of behavioral treatment for urinary incontinence.

19 Reads
  • Source
    • "Follow-up measurements were made at 3 and 12 months and included self-administered questionnaires about the symptoms of urinary incontinence, a 3-day bladder diary and a question about self-experienced changes in symptoms [8–17,25]. In addition, patients were asked to complete a monthly four-item questionnaire including a question about changes in symptoms, two questions about the severity of the incontinence, and a question on the number of absorbent pads used per day [9] [25] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Female urinary incontinence is a common condition that has a negative influence on quality of life and generates high costs, but spontaneous help-seeking is limited. In the URINO trial the effects and cost-effectiveness of actively encouraging older women to undergo diagnostics and treatment for urinary incontinence were compared with usual care. Objectives: To describe the design of the URINO trial and to give data on the effect of treatment uptake after screening. In the discussion, the criteria of Wilson and Jungner are applied to discuss whether screening for urinary incontinence is suitable. Methods: In a cluster randomized trial all registered female patients aged ≥55 years received a screening questionnaire. The intervention consisted of actively encouraging women to undergo diagnostics, after which tailored treatment was offered. In the control group care as usual was offered, but uptake of diagnostics and treatment was not encouraged. Results The response rate was 76%. 31% reported urinary incontinence; of these, 47% was willing to participate. All patients in the intervention group underwent diagnostics and treatment uptake was 80%; in the control group this was 2%. Conclusion: To increase treatment uptake, screening must be followed by active encouragement for further diagnostics and treatment. Based on the principles of Wilson and Jungner, female urinary incontinence is a condition suitable for screening. The effect of treatment however needs further evaluation before screening can be recommended. The results of the URINO trial will fill this gap in knowledge.
    Maturitas 02/2013; 74(4). DOI:10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.12.015 · 2.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In this study, the incontinence episodes were reduced after doing pelvic floor exercises, even if the potential interfering variables were not taken into account. These results occurred despite the drugs taken (benzodiazepines, antidepressants, or diuretics) or the diseases suffered (diabetes, fecal incontinence), which would normally have excluded these participants from other studies.9,13,14 These risk factors were not frequent in this sample, however. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Urinary incontinence is a medical, psychological, social, economic, and hygienic problem. Although it is difficult to state its prevalence, all authors agree that it is related to age and gender. This study aimed to carry out a urinary incontinence behavioral treatment in order to reduce urine leakages in 14 participants recruited from a senior center. The program consists of daily training of the pelvic floor muscles with a weekly control by a supervisor during a 2-month period and follow-up of results 2 months after the last control session. Urinary incontinence episodes were reduced by 75.67% after program completion. It appears that pelvic floor muscles training, carried out under controlled and constant supervision, significantly reduces urinary leakage. Moreover, maintaining this improvement after treatment depends on the continuation of the exercises as well as on the urinary leakage frequency baseline and the urinary leakage frequency during the last treatment session.
    Clinical Interventions in Aging 06/2011; 6(1):133-9. DOI:10.2147/CIA.S17945 · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "focusing attention on aspects the researcher thinks are important, and overlooking issues crucial to the patient and therefore limiting the responses. Answers are only as good as the questions you ask; sound questionnaire design is imperative (Burgio et al., 2006). "

Show more