International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 53–56 | Cite as

Has the true prevalence of voiding difficulty in urogynecology patients been underestimated?

  • Bernard T. Haylen
  • Surya Krishnan
  • Serena Schulz
  • Louise Verity
  • Matthew Law
  • Jialun Zhou
  • John Sutherst
Original Article


Voiding difficulty has been relatively overlooked as a diagnosis. Previous estimates of its prevalence have generally been no more than 14% with one exception at 24%. The aim of this study is to determine the true prevalence and associations of voiding difficulty using a validated definition [urine flow rate under 10th centile of the Liverpool Nomograms and/or residual urine volume (by transvaginal ultrasound) more than 30 ml]. This study involved 592 women referred for an initial urogynecological assessment including urodynamics. Data were separated according to the presence or absence of voiding difficulty. The prevalence of voiding difficulty was 39%, far higher than previous estimates. It is the third most common urodynamic diagnosis behind urodynamic stress incontinence (USI—72%) and uterine/vaginal prolapse (61%) and ahead of the overactive bladder (13%). Voiding difficulty significantly increased in prevalence with age and increasing grades of all types of uterine/vaginal prolapse. Prolapse appeared to be the main factor in the age deterioration. Other significant positive relationships with voiding difficulty were prior hysterectomy and prior continence surgery, whilst USI and the symptom and sign of stress incontinence had significant inverse relationships.


Urinary incontinence Urodynamics Voiding difficulty Uterine/vaginal prolapse 


  1. 1.
    Sutherst JR, Frazer MI, Richmond DH, Haylen BT (1990) Introduction to clinical gynaecological urology. Butterworths, London, p 121Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stanton SL, Ozsoy D, Hilton P (1983) Voiding difficulties in the female: prevalence, clinical and urodynamics review. Obstet Gynecol 61:144–147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC (2000) Bladder outflow obstruction in women: definition and characteristics. Neurourol Urodyn 19:213–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Massey JA, Abrams PH (1988) Obstructed voiding in the female. Br J Urol 61:36–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Costantini E, Mearini E, Pajoncini C et al (2003) Uroflowmetry in female voiding disturbances. Neurourol Urodyn 22:569–573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haylen BT, Ashby, D, Sutherst, JR et al (1989) Maximum and average urine flow rates in normal male and female populations—the Liverpool Nomograms. Brit J Urol 64:30–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haylen BT, Parys BT, Anyaegbunam WI et al (1990) Urine flow rates in male and female urodynamics patients compared with the Liverpool Nomograms. Brit J Urol 65:483–487PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haylen BT, Law, MG, Frazer M, Schulz S (1999) Urine flow rates and residual urine volumes in urogynaecology patients. Int Urogynecol J 10:378–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Versi E, Harvey MA, Hudson LB (1999) The symptom of voiding dysfunction: its predictive value in the diagnosis of emptying function disorder. Urogynaecologia 2:71Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haylen BT (1989) Residual urine volumes in a normal female population: an application of transvaginal ultrasound. Br J Urol 64:347–349PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    O’Grady F, Cattell WR (1966) Kinetics of urinary tract infection. II. The bladder. Br J Urol 38:156–162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haylen BT, Parys BT, Verity L, Schulz S, Zhou J, Law MG, Sutherst JR (2005) Can we identify the women more likely to experience recurrent UTI. Int Urogynecol J 16(Suppl 2):S45Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang A, Mostwin J, Genadry R, Sanders R (1993) Patterns of prolapse demonstrated with dynamic fastscan MRI: reassessment of conventional concepts of pelvic floor weaknesses. Neurourol Urodyn 12:310Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bump R, Bo K, Brubaker L et al (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haylen BT, Frazer MI, Sutherst JR, West CR (1989) Transvaginal ultrasound in the assessment of bladder volumes in women. Preliminary report. Br J Urol 63:149–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haylen BT (1989) Verification of the accuracy and range of transvaginal ultrasound in measuring bladder volumes in women. Br J Urol 64:350–352PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fantl JA, Smith PJ, Schneider V et al (1982) Fluid weight uroflowmetry in women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 145:1017–1024Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten et al (2003) The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function. Report from the standardisation subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Urology 61:37–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ryall RL, Marshall VR (1982) The effect of urinary catheter on the measurement of maximum urinary flow rate. J Urol 128:429–432PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosenzweig BA (1993) Genital prolapse and lower urinary tract dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 4:296–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Parys BT, Haylen BT, Woolfenden KA, Parsons KF (1989) Vesico-urethral dysfunction after simply hysterectomy. Neurourol Urodyn 8:315–316Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ulmsten UJ, Johnson P, Rezapour M (1999) A three-year follow-up of tension-free vaginal tape for surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 106:345–350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Groutz A, Gordon D, Avni A, Lessing JB, David MP (1998) Subjective symptoms of voiding difficulties—are they substantiated by objective urodynamics data? Neurourol Urodyn 17(4):430–431Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Salvatore S, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Digesu AG, Soligo M, Lalia M, Milani R (2000) Urodynamic studies in obstructed women. Neurourol Urodyn 19(4):480–481Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Haylen BT (2000) Voiding difficulty in women (editorial). Int Urogynecol J 11(1):1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Urogynecology Journal 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard T. Haylen
    • 1
  • Surya Krishnan
    • 2
  • Serena Schulz
    • 1
  • Louise Verity
    • 1
  • Matthew Law
    • 3
  • Jialun Zhou
    • 3
  • John Sutherst
    • 4
  1. 1.St Vincent’s ClinicDarlinghurstAustralia
  2. 2.St Vincent’s HospitalDarlinghurstAustralia
  3. 3.National Centre in HIV Epidemiology & Clinical ResearchUniversity of New South WalesKensingtonAustralia
  4. 4.Liverpool Women’s HospitalLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations