Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Mixed incontinence is more bothersome than pure incontinence subtypes

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to compare incontinence bother in women with mixed incontinence versus pure incontinence subtypes. This is an institutional review board-approved study comparing physical exam findings and responses to the Medical Epidemiologic and Social Aspects of Aging (MESA) questionnaire and the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6). The MESA responses were used to classify women as mixed, pure stress, or pure urge incontinence. This analysis includes 551 women with a mean age of 56 ± 16 years. Most women were Caucasian (86%) with 7% African American and 5% Hispanic. UDI scores were significantly higher in women with mixed incontinence (61 ± 23) than those with pure stress incontinence (40 ± 26) or pure urge incontinence (40 ± 25; p < 0.0001). Women with mixed incontinence report greater incontinence bother than women with either pure stress or urge incontinence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 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. Neurourol Urodyn 21:167–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bump RC, Norton PA, Zinner NR, Yalcin I (2003) Duloxetine Urinary Incontinence Study G: Mixed urinary incontinence symptoms: urodynamic findings, incontinence severity, and treatment response. Obstet Gynecol 102:76–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cardozo LD, Stanton SL (1980) Genuine stress incontinence and detrusor instability—a review of 200 patients. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 87(3):184–190

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sandvik H, Hunskaar S, Vanvik A, Bratt H, Seim A, Hermstad R (1995) Diagnostic classification of female urinary incontinence: an epidemiological survey corrected for validity. J Clin Epidemiol 48:339–343

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Weidner AC, Myers ER, Visco AG, Cundiff GW, Bump RC (2001) Which women with stress incontinence require urodynamic evaluation? Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:20–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S (2000) A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence: the Norwegian EPINCONT study. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1150–1157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 Geron 45:M67–M74

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Barber M, Walters M, Bump R (2005) Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol 193:103–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Nager CW, Schulz JA, Stanton SL, Monga A (2001) Correlation of urethral closure pressure, leak-point pressure and incontinence severity measures. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 12:395–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Stach-Lempinen B, Kirkinen P, Laippala P, Metsanoja R, Kujansuu E (2004) Do objective urodynamic or clinical findings determine impact of urinary incontinence or its treatment on quality of life? Urology 63:67–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Iker S, Onaran M, Aksakal N, Acar C, Tan MO, Acar A, Bozkirli I (2006) The impact of urinary incontinence on female sexual function. Adv Ther 23(6):999–1008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Conflicts of interest

Dr. Dooley: none; Dr. Lowenstein: none; Dr. Kenton: NICHD, NIDDK; Dr. Fitzgerald: NICHD, NIDDK; Dr. Brubaker: Pfizer, Q-med, Allergan, NICHD, NIDDK.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yashika Dooley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dooley, Y., Lowenstein, L., Kenton, K. et al. Mixed incontinence is more bothersome than pure incontinence subtypes. Int Urogynecol J 19, 1359–1362 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0637-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0637-4

Keywords

Navigation