Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The iceberg of health care utilization in women with urinary incontinence

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

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The objective of the study was to estimate prevalence of urinary incontinence (UI) health care utilization in women from the population up to specialty care.

Methods

The General Longitudinal Overactive Bladder Evaluation–UI (GLOBE-UI) is a population-based study on the natural history of UI in women ≥ 40 years of age. Prevalence of UI was estimated by using the Bladder Health Survey (BHS). Survey data were linked with electronic health records to build the different steps of the iceberg of disease. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence estimates at all levels of the iceberg.

Results

A total sample of 7,059 women received the BHS. Of those, 3,316 (47 %) responded. Prevalence of UI was 1,366 (41 %). Women with or without UI did not differ by age or marital status. However, women with versus without UI were more parous (91 vs 87 %), significantly more overweight or obese (74 vs 61 %), and more likely to have a college education or higher (54 vs 46 %), P < 0.01. Nine hundred fifty-eight (73 %) women with UI reported duration of more than 2 years and 72 % reported moderate to severe UI symptoms. Of all 1,366 women with BHS UI diagnosis, only 339 (25 %) sought care, 313 (23 %) received some care, and 164 (12 %) received subspecialty care.

Conclusions

UI is a highly prevalent disease. Only a minority with UI appears to seek care and a fraction sees a pelvic floor specialist. It is important not only to educate women, but also primary care providers about this highly prevalent yet treatable condition.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abrams P, Kelleher CJ, Kerr LA, Rogers RG (2000) Overactive bladder significantly affects quality of life. Am J Manag Care 6:S580–S590

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Simeonova Z, Milsom I, Kullendorff AM, Molander U, Bengtsson C (1999) The prevalence of urinary incontinence and its influence on the quality of life in women from an urban Swedish population. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 78:546–551

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Melville JL, Fan MY, Rau H, Nygaard IE, Katon WJ (2009) Major depression and urinary incontinence in women: temporal associations in an epidemiologic sample. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201:490.e1–490.e7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S, Norwegian EPINCONT study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag (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 53:1150–1157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 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 46:473–480

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Milsom I (2000) The prevalence of urinary incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 79:1056–1059

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Minassian VA, Drutz HP, Al-Badr A (2003) Urinary incontinence as a worldwide problem. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 82:327–338

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Hunskaar S (2002) Help-seeking and associated factors in female urinary incontinence. The Norwegian EPINCONT Study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag. Scand J Prim Health Care 20:102–107

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kinchen KS, Burgio K, Diokno AC, Fultz NH, Bump R, Obenchain R (2003) Factors associated with women’s decisions to seek treatment for urinary incontinence. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 12:687–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaw C, Brittain K, Tansey R, Williams K (2008) How people decide to seek health care: a qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud 45:1516–1524

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Verbrugge LM, Ascione FJ (1987) Exploring the iceberg. Common symptoms and how people care for them. Med Care 25:539–569

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lipton RB, Stewart WF, Celentano DD, Reed ML (1992) Undiagnosed migraine headaches. A comparison of symptom-based and reported physician diagnosis. Arch Intern Med 152:1273–1278

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hu TW, Wagner TH, Bentkover JD, Leblanc K, Zhou SZ, Hunt T (2004) Costs of urinary incontinence and overactive bladder in the United States: a comparative study. Urology 63:461–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Donnell M, Lose G, Sykes D, Voss S, Hunskaar S (2005) Help-seeking behaviour and associated factors among women with urinary incontinence in France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom. Eur Urol 47:385–392, discussion 392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stewart WF, Minassian VA, Hirsch AG, Kolodner K, Fitzgerald M, Burgio K et al (2010) Predictors of variability in urinary incontinence and overactive bladder symptoms. Neurourol Urodyn 29:328–335

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hirsch AG, Minassian VA, Dilley A, Sartorius J, Stewart WF (2010) Parity is not associated with urgency with or without urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 21:1095–1102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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 19:137–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Melville JL, Katon W, Delaney K, Newton K (2005) Urinary incontinence in US women: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med 165:537–542

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Minassian VA, Stewart WF, Hirsch AG (2008) Why do stress and urge incontinence co-occur much more often than expected? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:1429–1440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Minassian VA, Stewart WF, Wood CG (2008) Urinary incontinence in women: variation in prevalence estimates and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol 111:324–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dooley Y, Lowenstein L, Kenton K, FitzGerald M, Brubaker L (2008) Mixed incontinence is more bothersome than pure incontinence subtypes. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:1359–1362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Frick AC, Huang AJ, Van den Eeden SK, Knight SK, Creasman JM, Yang J et al (2009) Mixed urinary incontinence: greater impact on quality of life. J Urol 182:596–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shaw C, Tansey R, Jackson C, Hyde C, Allan R (2001) Barriers to help seeking in people with urinary symptoms. Fam Pract 18:48–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Frieden TR (2010) A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid. Am J Public Health 100:590–595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nygaard IE, Heit M (2004) Stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 104:607–620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shamliyan T, Wyman J, Bliss DZ, Kane RL, Wilt TJ (2007) Prevention of urinary and fecal incontinence in adults. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 161:1–379

    Google Scholar 

  27. Irwin DE, Milsom I, Kopp Z, Abrams P, EPIC Study Group (2008) Symptom bother and health care-seeking behavior among individuals with overactive bladder. Eur Urol 53:1029–1037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hägglund D, Walker-Engström ML, Larsson G, Leppert J (2003) Reasons why women with long-term urinary incontinence do not seek professional help: a cross-sectional population-based cohort study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14:296–304, discussion 304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Eaker S, Bergström R, Bergström A, Adami HO, Nyren O (1998) Response rate to mailed epidemiologic questionnaires: a population-based randomized trial of variations in design and mailing routines. Am J Epidemiol 147:74–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Dallosso HM, Matthews RJ, McGrother CW, Clarke M, Perry SI, Shaw C et al (2003) An investigation into nonresponse bias in a postal survey on urinary symptoms. BJU Int 91:631–636

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

This research was funded by National Institute of Health/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, grant # RO1 DK082551. No author on this paper has a conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vatche A. Minassian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Minassian, V.A., Yan, X., Lichtenfeld, M.J. et al. The iceberg of health care utilization in women with urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 23, 1087–1093 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1743-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1743-x

Keywords

Navigation