International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 21, Issue 10, pp 1223–1229 | Cite as

The Hordaland women’s cohort: prevalence, incidence, and remission of urinary incontinence in middle-aged women

  • David Jahanlu
  • Steinar Hunskaar
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of study is to prospectively investigate the prevalence, incidence, and remission of urinary incontinence (UI) in a cohort of middle-aged women.


In 1997–1999, 2,229 randomly selected women aged 41–45 agreed to participate in the Hordaland Women’s Cohort, and six almost identical postal questionnaires were sent them during the following 10 years. Response rate was 95.7% at inclusion and has remained 87% to 93% in subsequent waves; 64.1% answered all six questionnaires. UI variables include type, amount, frequency, and severity.


Prevalence of UI increased by age until a peak in age group 51–52 years for any (50.3%) and significant (10.0%) UI. There was then a decrease in prevalence caused by a decrease in incidence and decrease in remission. Stress UI was the major type and most UI was of low severity.


Prevalence of any UI is high in middle-aged women but reaches a peak followed by a decrease.


Incidence Middle-aged women Prevalence Remission Urinary incontinence 



The Hordaland women’s cohort as a sub-study of the Hordaland Health Study was performed in collaboration with the Norwegian National Health Screening Service and the University of Bergen.

Funding was obtained from Norwegian Research Council (NFR), The Western Norway Regional Health Authority, and the University of Bergen.

Conflict of Interest



  1. 1.
    Grodstein F, Fretts R, Lifford K, Resnick N, Curhan G (2003) Association of age, race, and obstetric history with urinary symptoms among women in the nurses' health study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:428–434CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hunskaar S, Burgio K, Diokno A, Herzog AR, Hjalmas K, Lapitan MC (2003) Epidemiology and natural history of urinary incontinence in women. Urology 62:16–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeLancey JO, Kane Low L, Miller JM, Patel DA, Tumbarello JA (2008) Graphic integration of causal factors of pelvic floor disorders: an integrated life span model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199:610.e1–610.e5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goepel C, Hefler L, Methfessel HD, Koelbl H (2003) Periurethral connective tissue status of postmenopausal women with genital prolapse with and without stress incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 82:659–664PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO (2007) Functional anatomy of the female pelvic floor. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1101:266–296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith AR, Hosker GL, Warrell DW (1989) The role of pudendal nerve damage in the aetiology of genuine stress incontinence in women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 96:29–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fultz NH, Herzog AR (2000) Prevalence of urinary incontinence in middle-aged and older women: a survey-based methodological experiment. J Aging Health 12:459–469CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheater FM, Castleden CM (2000) Epidemiology and classification of urinary incontinence. Baillières Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 14:183–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S (2000) A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence: the norwegian epincont study. Epidemiology of incontinence in the county of nord-trondelag. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1150–1157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Minassian VA, Stewart WF, Wood GC (2008) Urinary incontinence in women: variation in prevalence estimates and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol 111:324–331PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Swanson JG, Kaczorowski J, Skelly J, Finkelstein M (2005) Urinary incontinence: common problem among women over 45. Can Fam Physician 51:84–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hunskaar S, Burgio K, Clark A, Lapitan MC, Nelson R, Sillen U et al (2004) Epidemiology of urinary (UI) and faecal (FI) incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A (eds) Incontinence, basics and evaluation. Health Publication, Plymouth, pp 255–312Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Townsend MK, Danforth KN, Lifford KL, Rosner B, Curhan GC, Resnick NM et al (2007) Incidence and remission of urinary incontinence in middle-aged women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197(167):e161–e165Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holtedahl K, Verelst M, Schiefloe A, Hunskaar S (2000) Usefulness of urodynamic examination in female urinary incontinence–lessons from a population-based, randomized, controlled study of conservative treatment. Scand J Urol Nephrol 34:169–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Samuelsson EC, Victor FT, Svardsudd KF (2000) Five-year incidence and remission rates of female urinary incontinence in a swedish population less than 65 years old. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:568–574CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moller LA, Lose G, Jorgensen T (2000) Incidence and remission rates of lower urinary tract symptoms at one year in women aged 40–60: longitudinal study. BMJ 320:1429–1432CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ostbye T, Seim A, Krause KM, Feightner J, Hachinski V, Sykes E et al (2004) A 10-year follow-up of urinary and fecal incontinence among the oldest old in the community: the canadian study of health and aging. Can J Aging 23:319–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Herzog AR, Diokno AC, Brown MB, Normolle DP, Brock BM (1990) Two-year incidence, remission, and change patterns of urinary incontinence in noninstitutionalized older adults. J Gerontol 45:M67–M74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McGrother CW, Donaldson MM, Shaw C, Matthews RJ, Hayward TA, Dallosso HM et al (2004) Storage symptoms of the bladder: Prevalence, incidence and need for services in the UK. BJU Int 93:763–769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jahanlu D, Qureshi SA, Hunskaar S (2008) The hordaland women's cohort: a prospective cohort study of incontinence, other urinary tract symptoms and related health issues in middle-aged women. BMC Public Health 8:296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sandvik H, Seim A, Vanvik A, Hunskaar S (2000) A severity index for epidemiological surveys of female urinary incontinence. Comparison with 48-hour pad weighing tests. Neurourol Urodyn 19:137–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U et al (2002) The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the international continence society. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:116–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thom D (1998) Variation in estimates of urinary incontinence prevalence in the community: Effects of differences in definition, population characteristics, and study type. J Am Geriatr Soc 46:473–480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sherburn M, Guthrie JR, Dudley EC, O'Connell HE, Dennerstein L (2001) Is incontinence associated with menopause? Obstet Gynecol 98:628–633CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hagglund D, Walker-Engstrom ML, Larsson G, Leppert J (2004) Changes in urinary incontinence and quality of life after four years. A population-based study of women aged 22–50 years. Scand J Prim Health Care 22:112–117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moller LA, Lose G, Jorgensen T (2000) The prevalence and bothersomeness of lower urinary tract symptoms in women 40–60 years of age. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 79:298–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Milsom IAD, Lapitan MC, Nelson R, Sillén U, Thom D (2009) Epidemiology of urinary (UI) and faecal (FI) incontinence and pelvic organ prolaps (POP). In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A (eds) Incontinence. Health Publication, Plymouth, pp 35–111Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Melville JL, Katon W, Delaney K, Newton K (2005) Urinary incontinence in us women: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med 165:537–542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Herzog AR, Fultz NH (1990) Prevalence and incidence of urinary incontinence in community-dwelling populations. J Am Geriatr Soc 38:273–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McKinlay JB, Link CL (2007) Measuring the urologic iceberg: design and implementation of the boston area community health (BACH) survey. Eur Urol 52:389–396CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public Health and Primary Health CareUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations