Skip to main content


Log in

Current state of bladder diary: a survey and review of the literature

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


Introduction and hypothesis

The objectives of this study are (1) to assess practice patterns among urogynecology/female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) providers regarding the use of bladder diaries (BD) and (2) to review the literature regarding BD.


For the first objective, a survey was emailed to United States-based urogynecology providers in 2019 querying frequency of use of bladder diaries (FBD), indications, problems, patient education methods, and perception of utility. Chi-square tests and multiple logistic regression were performed. For the second objective, we reviewed literature published in English by searching the terms “voiding,” “bladder,” or “incontinence,” in combination with “diary,” “log,” or “questionnaire.”


A total of 371 of 851 (43.5%) contacted providers responded. Nearly 80% were attending physicians, 75.5% of whom completed the FPMRS fellowship; 20.8% of all respondents and nearly 25% of fellowship-trained attendings reported FBD <20% in the last year. FPMRS providers were more likely to report FBD >80%. A total of 97.5% of respondents cited difficulty in using BD. Most (71.6%) taught patients to use BD themselves or shared responsibility with a nonphysician staff member (53.4%). BD is a validated and valuable instrument; however, there are obstacles to its use. Despite recent innovations including electronic and automated BD, there is a paucity of data regarding the provider-viewed challenges in implementing BD.


The literature supports the use of BD; however, many survey respondents, including fellowship-trained attendings, never or rarely use BD. Most respondents reported difficulty in using BD. More research is needed to improve the ease, accuracy, and widespread adaptation of BD use in clinical practice.

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

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 155: Urinary Incontinence in Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):e66-e81.

  2. Harding CK, Lapitan MC, Arlandis S, Bo K, Costantini E, Groen J, et al. EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Female Lower Urinary Tract Symtpoms (LUTS). The European Association of Urology Annual Congress. Amsterdam 2021.

  3. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Wagg A, Wein A. Incontinence. 6th ed. Bristol: International Continence Society; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Perrouin-Verbe MA, Drake MJ, Thomas L. The Challenges of Real-life Bladder Diary Use and Interpretation. European Urology Focus. 2022.

  5. Pauls RN, Hanson E, Crisp CC. Voiding diaries: adherence in the clinical setting. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(1):91–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cameron AP, Wiseman JB, Smith AR, Merion RM, Gillespie BW, Bradley CS, et al. Are three-day voiding diaries feasible and reliable? Results from the Symptoms of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Research Network (LURN) cohort. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019;38(8):2185–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Rychik K, Policastro L, Weiss J, Blaivas J. Relationship between maximum voided volume obtained by bladder diary compared to contemporaneous uroflowmetry in men and women. Int Braz J Urol: Off J Braz Soc Urol. 2021;47(6):1189–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dmochowski RR, Sanders SW, Appell RA, Nitti VW, Davila GW. Bladder-health diaries: an assessment of 3-day vs 7-day entries. BJU Int. 2005;96(7):1049–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schick E, Jolivet-Tremblay M, Dupont C, Bertrand PE, Tessier J. Frequency-volume chart: the minimum number of days required to obtain reliable results. Neurourol Urodyn. 2003;22(2):92–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC, Resnick NM, Engleman K, Anzalone D, et al. Noninvasive outcome measures of urinary incontinence and lower urinary tract symptoms: a multicenter study of micturition diary and pad tests. J Urol. 2000;164(3 Pt 1):698–701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dixon CA, Nakib NA. Are Bladder Diaries Helpful in Management of Overactive Bladder? Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports. 2016;11(1):14–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wyman JF, Choi SC, Harkins SW, Wilson MS, Fantl JA. The urinary diary in evaluation of incontinent women: a test-retest analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;71(6 Pt 1):812–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brown JS, McNaughton KS, Wyman JF, Burgio KL, Harkaway R, Bergner D, et al. Measurement characteristics of a voiding diary for use by men and women with overactive bladder. Urology. 2003;61(4):802–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Yap TL, Cromwell DC, Emberton M. A systematic review of the reliability of frequency-volume charts in urological research and its implications for the optimum chart duration. BJU Int. 2007;99(1):9–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tincello DG, Williams KS, Joshi M, Assassa RP, Abrams KR. Urinary diaries: a comparison of data collected for three days versus seven days. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2 Pt 1):277–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Elmer C, Murphy A, Elliott JO, Book NM. Twenty-Four-Hour Voiding Diaries Versus 3-Day Voiding Diaries: A Clinical Comparison. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2017;23(6):429–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bright E, Cotterill N, Drake M, Abrams P. Developing and validating the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire bladder diary. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):294–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nygaard I, Holcomb R. Reproducibility of the seven-day voiding diary in women with stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2000;11(1):15–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ku JH, Jeong IG, Lim DJ, Byun SS, Paick JS, Oh SJ. Voiding diary for the evaluation of urinary incontinence and lower urinary tract symptoms: Prospective assessment of patient compliance and burden. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004a;23(4):331–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bright E, Drake MJ, Abrams P. Urinary diaries: evidence for the development and validation of diary content, format, and duration. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(3):348–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bright E, Cotterill N, Drake M, Abrams P. Developing a validated urinary diary: phase 1. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(5):625–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jimenez-Cidre MA, Lopez-Fando L, Esteban-Fuertes M, Prieto-Chaparro L, Llorens-Martinez FJ, Salinas-Casado J, et al. The 3-day bladder diary is a feasible, reliable and valid tool to evaluate the lower urinary tract symptoms in women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(2):128–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Homma Y, Ando T, Yoshida M, Kageyama S, Takei M, Kimoto K, et al. Voiding and incontinence frequencies: variability of diary data and required diary length. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(3):204–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Homma Y, Kakizaki H, Yamaguchi O, Yamanishi T, Nishizawa O, Yokoyama O, et al. Assessment of overactive bladder symptoms: comparison of 3-day bladder diary and the overactive bladder symptoms score. Urology. 2011;77(1):60–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fayyad AM, Hill SR, Jones G. Urine production and bladder diary measurements in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus and their relation to lower urinary tract symptoms and voiding dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(3):354–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Abdelmoteleb H, Kamel MI, Hashim H. The association between the ICIQ-LUTS and the ICIQ-bladder diary in assessing LUTS. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(6):1601–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ertberg P, Moller LA, Lose G. A comparison of three methods to evaluate maximum bladder capacity: Cystometry, uroflowmetry and a 24-h voiding diary in women with urinary incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003;82(4):374–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Brummen HJ, Heintz APM, Van Der Vaart CH. The Association between Overactive Bladder Symptoms and Objective Parameters from Bladder Diary and Filling Cystometry. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(1):38–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Daan NMP, Schweitzer KJ, Van Der Vaart CH. Associations between subjective overactive bladder symptoms and objective parameters on bladder diary and filling cystometry. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2012;23(11):1619–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hsiao SM, Hsiao CF, Chen CH, Chang TC, Wu WY, Lin HH. Evaluation of Bladder Diary Parameters Based on Correlation with the Volume at Strong Desire to Void in Filling Cystometry. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(7) (no pagination).

  31. Vella M, Robinson D, Cardozo L, Mastoroudes H, Vig M. The bladder diary: Do women perceive it as a useful investigation? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;162(2):221–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ku JH, Lim DJ, Byun SS, Paick JS, Oh SJ. Nocturia and complementary indices: determination and quantification of the cause of nocturia by frequency-volume charts in women with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urol Res. 2004b;32(3):181–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ku JH, Hong SK, Kim HH, Paick JS, Lee SE, Oh SJ. Is questionnaire enough to assess number of nocturic episodes? Prospective comparative study between data from questionnaire and frequency-volume charts. Urology. 2004c;64(5):966–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Stav K, Dwyer PL, Rosamilia A. Women Overestimate Daytime Urinary Frequency: The Importance of the Bladder Diary. J Urol. 2009;181(5):2176–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Afraa TA, Mahfouz W, Campeau L, Corcos J. Normal lower urinary tract assessment in women: I. Uroflowmetry and post-void residual, pad tests, and bladder diaries. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(6):681–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kenton K, Fitzgerald MP, Brubaker L. What is a clinician to do-believe the patient or her urinary diary? J Urol. 2006;176(2):633–5; discussion 5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hillary CJ, Slovak M, McCarthy A, Hashim H, Chapple CR. Recent developments in technology for the assessment and management of incontinence. J Med Eng Technol. 2014;39(7):434–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sampselle CM. Behavioral intervention: the first-line treatment for women with urinary incontinence. Curr Urol Rep. 2003;4(5):356–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Robinson D, McClish DK, Wyman JF, Bump RC, Fanti JA. Comparison between urinary diaries completed with and without intensive patient instructions. Neurourol Urodyn. 1996;15(2):143–8.<143::AID-NAU3>3.0.CO;2-F.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Abrams P, Paty J, Martina R, Newgreen DT, van Maanen R, Paireddy A, et al. Electronic bladder diaries of differing duration versus a paper diary for data collection in overactive bladder. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(6):743–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pe Leve P, Pereira e Silva R, Lopes FA, Felicio J, Esteves A, Uren A, et al. Impact of Age, Education Level and Occupation on the Ability to Use the ICIQ-bladder Diary: Results From A Community Cohort Study Using a Predefined Clinical History. Urology. 2021;153:113–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE, Broderick JE, Hufford MR. Patient non-compliance with paper diaries. BMJ. 2002;324(7347):1193–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Townsend J. Development and Pilot Testing of a New Bladder Diary Format: Phase 1. Urology Practice. 2016;3(3):218–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rabin JM, McNett J, Badlani GH. Computerized voiding diary. Neurourol Urodyn. 1993;12(6):541–53; discussion 53-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Quinn P, Goka J, Richardson H. Assessment of an electronic daily diary in patients with overactive bladder. BJU Int. 2003;91(7):647–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Mangera A, Marzo A, Heron N, Fernando D, Hameed K, Soliman AHA, et al. Development of two electronic bladder diaries: A patient and healthcare professionals pilot study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33(7):1101–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sussman RD, Richter LA, Tefera E, Park AJ, Sokol AI, Gutman RE, et al. Utilizing Technology in Assessment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: A Randomized Trial of Electronic Versus Paper Voiding Diaries. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2016;22(4):224–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Vaccari NA, da Silveira LTY, Bortolini MAT, Haddad JM, Baracat EC, Ferreira EAG. Content and functionality features of voiding diary applications for mobile devices in Brazil: a descriptive analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(12):2573–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Takai S, Matsukawa Y, Hashizume N, Gotoh M. A small pilot study to evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of a novel automated voiding diary device for recording urine output measurements. Neurourol Urodyn. 2021;40(1):272–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


Alyssa Grimshaw: literature review data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



Mehta, Shailja, MD: Project development, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing.

Geng, Bertie, MD: Data collection and analysis, manuscript writing.

Xu, Xiao, PhD: Data analysis.

Harmanli, Oz, MD: Project development, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oz Harmanli.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest


Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This work was previously presented as a poster at the American Urogynecologic Society meeting in 2021.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mehta, S., Geng, B., Xu, X. et al. Current state of bladder diary: a survey and review of the literature. Int Urogynecol J 34, 809–823 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: