International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 24, Issue 7, pp 1127–1134

Patient reported outcome measures in women undergoing surgery for urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in Denmark, 2006–2011

  • Rikke Guldberg
  • Ulrik Schiøler Kesmodel
  • Jesper Kjær Hansen
  • Kim Oren Gradel
  • Søren Brostrøm
  • Linda Kærlev
  • Bente Mertz Nørgård
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of urogynecological surgery on quality of life based on patient reported outcome measures (PROMs).


Data were retrieved from the Danish Urogynaecological Database. Inclusion criteria were Danish women undergoing surgery for urinary incontinence (UI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP) from 2006 to 2011. Using frequency of symptoms and a visual analogue scale (VAS) both pre- and postoperatively, their severity of symptoms and quality of life were measured by questionnaires.


During the study period, 20,629 urogynecological procedures were performed. The questionnaires on severity of symptoms and the VAS had been completed both pre- and postoperatively for approximately one third of women undergoing surgery. For UI surgery, 83 % had improved symptoms, 13 % were unchanged, and 4 % had worse symptoms postoperatively. For POP surgery, 80, 17, and 3 % were improved, unchanged, and worsened, respectively. The postoperative bother of symptoms and interference in everyday life evaluated by VAS were significantly reduced for both UI [preoperative median VAS score 9, postoperative median score 1 (p < 0.001)] and POP [8 preoperatively and 0 postoperatively (p < 0.001)].


Based on PROMs, surgery for UI and POP is effective in alleviating symptoms associated with UI or POP, and it can improve quality of life in symptomatic women. Pre- and postoperative questionnaires are useful tools in assessing symptomatic outcome measures after surgery.


Patient reported outcome measures Pelvic organ prolapse Quality of life Questionnaire Urinary incontinence Visual analogue scale 



Urinary incontinence


Pelvic organ prolapse


Visual analogue scale


Danish National Urogynaecological Database


Patient reported outcome measures


American Society of Anesthesiologists classification


Body mass index


  1. 1.
    Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL et al (2008) Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA 300:1311–1316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goode PS, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Markland AD (2010) Incontinence in older women. JAMA 303(21):2172–2181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S et al (2000) A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence: the Norwegian EPINCONT study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1150–1157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Møller LA, Lose G, Jørgensen T (2000) The prevalence and bothersomeness of lower urinary tract symptoms in women 40–60 years of age. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 79:298–305PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen BL, Barboglio P, Gousse A (2008) The impact of lower urinary tract symptoms and urinary incontinence on female sexual dysfunction using a validated instrument. J Sex Med 5(6):1418–1423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coyne KS, Wein AJ, Tubaro A et al (2009) The burden of lower urinary tract symptoms: evaluating the effect of LUTS on health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression: EpiLUTS. BJU Int 103:4–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Riss P, Kargl J (2011) Quality of life and urinary incontinence in women. Maturitas 68:137–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Norton P, Brubaker L (2006) Urinary incontinence in women. Lancet 367:57–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Olson AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89(4):501–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fialkow MF, Newton KM, Lentz GM, Weiss NS (2008) Lifetime risk of surgical management for pelvic organ prolapse or urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:437–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Danish Urogynaecological Database, annual report, 2011 (Danish). Available via Accessed 26 June 2012
  12. 12.
    Reis FM, Smith ARB, Dunn G (2007) Which questionnaire? A psychometric evaluation of three patient-based outcome measures used to assess surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 26:123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rodríguez LV, Blander DS, Dorey F, Raz S, Zimmern P (2003) Discrepancy in patient and physician perception of patient’s quality of life related to urinary symptoms. Urology 62:49–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marshall S, Haywood K, Fitzpatrick R (2006) Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review. J Eval Clin Pract 12:559–568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kingsley G, Scott IC, Scott DL (2011) Quality of life and the outcome of established rheumatoid arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 25(4):585–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abrams P, Artibani W, Gajewski JB, Hussain I (2006) Assessment of treatment outcomes in patients with overactive bladder: importance of objective and subjective measures. Urology 68:17–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM et al (2010) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 21(1):5–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abrams P, Avery K, Gardener N, Donovan J et al (2006) The International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire: J Urol 175(3):1063–1066
  19. 19.
    Price N, Jackson SR, Avery K, Brookes ST, Abrams P (2006) Development and psychometric evaluation of the ICIQ Vaginal Symptoms Questionnaire: the ICIQ-VS. BJOG 113(6):700–712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M (2011) The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health 39(7 Suppl):30–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guldberg R, Brostrøm S, Hansen JK et al (2012) The Danish Urogynaecological Database: establishment, completeness and validity. Int Urogynecol J (in press)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaerlev L, Kolstad HA, Hansen AM et al (2011) Are risk estimates biased in follow-up studies of psychosocial factors with low base-line participation? BMC Public Health 11:539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Svenningsen R, Borstad E, Spydslaug AE, Sandvik L, Staff AC (2012) Occult incontinence as predictor for postoperative stress urinary incontinence following pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J 23:843–849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fatton B (2009) Is there any evidence to advocate SUI prevention in continent women undergoing prolapse repair? An overview. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20:235–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wei JT, Nygaard I, Richter HE et al (2012) A midurethral sling to reduce incontinence after vaginal prolapse repair. N Engl J Med 366:2358–2367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Soll-Johanning H, Hannerz H, Tüchsen F (2004) Referral bias in hospital register studies of geographical and industrial differences in health. Dan Med Bull 51:207–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hellberg D, Holmgren C, Lanner L, Nilsson S (2007) The very obese women and the very old woman: tension-free vaginal tape for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(4):423–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lorenzo-Gómez MF, Gómez-García A, Padilla-Fernández B et al (2011) Risk factors for failure after transobturator vaginal tape for urinary incontinence (in Spanish). Actas Urol Esp 35(8):454–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Meschia M, Pifarotti P, Gattei U, Bertozzi R (2007) Tension-free vaginal tape: analysis of risk factors for failures. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(4):419–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Barber MD (2007) Questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:461–465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Castillo PA, Espaillat-Rijo LM, Davila GW (2010) Outcome measures and definition of cure in female stress urinary incontinence surgery: a survey of recent publications. Int Urogynecol J 21:343–348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rikke Guldberg
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ulrik Schiøler Kesmodel
    • 3
  • Jesper Kjær Hansen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kim Oren Gradel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Søren Brostrøm
    • 4
  • Linda Kærlev
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bente Mertz Nørgård
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Research Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical ResearchUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Centre for National Clinical Databases, SouthOdense University HospitalOdense CDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyAarhus University HospitalAarhusDenmark
  4. 4.Department of Hospital Services and Emergency ManagementDanish Health and Medicines AuthorityCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations