Skip to main content

Self-Report Measurement of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: A Commentary on the Literature Since 2011

Current Urology Reports volume 13, pages 420–426 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

Self-report assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is complicated by the many tools that are available. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is widely used and highly recommended in review articles and practice guidelines. This review focuses on work completed since 2011 using the IPSS and other tools. The focus of the review is on the merits and weakness of existing tools, as well as a discussion of how to move the field forward, given that there is already a strong base of questionnaires. Some specific trends in health measurement include the use of item response theory and computer adaptive testing, but it is unclear to what extent they will be adopted within urology. Many current studies in urology are making use of single items to assess important symptoms of interest, such as nocturia and incontinence, so future work might seek to catalogue best-in-class, single-question items.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as:• Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Campbell MF, Walsh PC, Wein AJ. Campbell-Walsh urology. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Griffith JW, Zinbarg R, Craske M, Mineka S, Rose RD, Waters AM, Sutton JM. Neuroticism as a common dimension in the internalizing disorders. Psychol Med. 2010;40:1125–36.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Watson D. Differentiating the mood and anxiety disorders: a quadripartite model. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2009;5:221–47.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Matza L, Zyczynski T, Bavendam T. A review of quality-of-life questionnaires for urinary incontinence and overactive bladder: which ones to use and why? Curr Urol Rep. 2004;5:336–42.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Coyne KS, Tubaro A, Brubaker L, Bavendam T. Development and validation of patient-reported outcomes measures for overactive bladder: a review of concepts. Urology. 2006;68:9–16.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Coyne KS, Margolis MK, Hsieh R, Vats V, Chapple CR. Validation of the urinary sensation scale (USS). Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:360–5.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lowenstein L, Rickey L, Kenton K, FitzGerald M, Brubaker L, Tulke M, Fordham J, Mueller E. Reliability and responsiveness of the Urgency Severity and Life Impact Questionnaire (USIQ). Int Urogynecol. 2012;23:193–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Margolis MK, Vats V, Coyne KS, Kelleher C. Establishing the content validity of the King's health questionnaire in men and women with overactive bladder in the US. Patient. 2011;4:177–87.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Barry MJ, Fowler Jr FJ, O'Leary MP, Bruskewitz RC, Holtgrewe HL, Mebust WK, Cockett AT. The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association. J Urol. 1992;148:1549–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Reynolds WS, Dmochowski RR, Penson DF. Epidemiology of stress urinary incontinence in women. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12:370–6.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Irwin DE, Kopp ZS, Kelleher CJ, Milsom I. The impact of overactive bladder, incontinence and other lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life, work productivity, sexuality and emotional well-being in men and women: results from the EPIC study. BJU Int. 2008;101:1388–95.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. • Aikawa K, Yamaguchi O, Oguro T, Ishibashi K, Yanagida T, Nomiya M, Haga N, Yoshiyasu T, Kobayashi T. New classification for men with lower urinary tract symptoms: cluster analysis using the International Prostate Symptom Score. BJU Int. 2012;110:408–12. This article describes a cluster analysis of the IPSS in an attempt to better subtype patients. This is an exciting new direction, especially if these subtypes can be linked to underlying disease processes, genetic markers, and/or treatment outcome.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Orabi H, Albersen M, Lue TF. Association of lower urinary tract symptoms and erectile dysfunction: pathophysiological aspects and implications for clinical management. Int J Impot Res. 2011;23:99–108.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. ICIQ Advisory Board, Abrams P, Avery K, Gardener N, Donovan J. The international consultation on incontinence modular questionnaire: www.iciq.net. J Urol. 2006;175:1063-6.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23:322–30.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Hoboken: Wiley; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  17. US Food and Drug Administration: Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims, 2009, 2011

  18. Berry SH, Bogart LM, Pham C, Liu K, Nyberg L, Stoto M, Suttorp M, Clemens JQ. Development, validation and testing of an epidemiological case definition of interstitial cystitis/Painful bladder syndrome. J Urol. 2010;183:1848–52.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Oelke M, Burger M, Castro-Diaz D, Chartier-Kastler E, Cidre MAJ, McNicholas T, Radziszewski P, Kirby M. Diagnosis and medical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in adult men: applying specialist guidelines in clinical practice. BJU Int. 2012;110:710–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Strope SA, Elliott SP, Smith A, Wei JT, Wilt TJ, Saigal CS. Urologist practice styles in the initial evaluation of elderly men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2011;77:535–40.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Markland AD, Vaughan CP, Johnson TM, Goode PS, Redden DT, Burgio KL. Prevalence of nocturia in United States men: results from the national health and nutrition examination survey. J Urol. 2011;185:998–1002.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sandvik H, Seim A, Vanvik A, Hunskaar S. A severity index for epidemiological surveys of female urinary incontinence: comparison with 48-hour pad-weighing tests. Neurourol Urodyn. 2000;19:137–45.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Platz EA, Joshu CE, Mondul AM, Peskoe SB, Willett WC, Giovannucci E. Incidence and progression of lower urinary tract symptoms in a large prospective cohort of United States men. J Urol. 2012;188:496–501.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lightner DJ, Krambeck AE, Jacobson DJ, McGree ME, Jacobsen SJ, Lieber MM, Roger VL, Girman CJ, St. Sauver JL. Nocturia is associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease and death. BJU Int. 2012;110:848–53.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Johnson TV, Abbasi A, Ehrlich SS, Kleris RS, Raison CL, Master VA. Nocturia associated with depressive symptoms. Urology. 2011;77:183–6.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kupelian V, Wei JT, O’Leary MP, Norgaard JP, Rosen RC, McKinlay JB. Nocturia and quality of life: results from the Boston area community health survey. Eur Urol. 2012;61:78–84.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Milsom I, Kaplan SA, Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Kopp ZS. Effect of bothersome overactive bladder symptoms on health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, and treatment seeking in the United States: results from EpiLUTS. Urology. 2012;80:90–6.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. •• Coyne KS, Barsdorf AI, Thompson C, Ireland A, Milsom I, Chapple C, Kopp ZS, Bavendam T. Moving towards a comprehensive assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31:448–54. This study describes a new alternative to the IPSS. The LUTS Tool from EpiLUTS is still relatively short (18 symptoms are covered), but it yields more information that the IPSS, including the assessment of incontinence. In general, the EpiLUTS study will contribute greatly to the measurement and in turn the clinical management of LUTS.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. •• Brubaker L, Khullar V, Piault E, Evans CJ, Bavendam T, Beach J, Yeh Y, Kopp ZS, Kelleher CJ, Trocio J. Goal attainment scaling in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: development and pilot testing of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire. Int Urogynecol. 2011;22:937–46. This study describes a tool that was developed, like many tools in urology, through qualitative assessment of patients as well as through expert input. There is a difference in focus, which is that patients identify what goals in treatment are most important to them, and can identify new goals that are not included on the questionnaire. This idiographic approach is well-known to psychologists with training in cognitive behavior therapy (such as myself). This approach is individualized and patient-focused, but one challenge will be seeing how it can be integrated into drug trials and how acceptable it will be to regulatory agencies, such as the FDA. One issue, for example, is that different patients might be assessed with different questions and/or endpoints..

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bradley CS, Brown JS, Eeden SK, Thom DH, Thom DH, Thom DH. Urinary incontinence self-report questions: reproducibility and agreement with bladder diary. Int Urogynecol. 2011;22:1565–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. American Urological Association. (2010). American Urological Association Guideline: Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH).

  33. Sarma AV, Wei JT. Clinical practice. Benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:248–57.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Roehrborn CG. Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Med Clin North Am. 2011;95:87–100.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Barry MJ, Williford WO, Chang Y, Machi M, Jones KM, Walker-Corkery E, Lepor H. Benign prostatic hyperplasia specific health status measures in clinical research: how much change in the American Urological Association symptom index and the benign prostatic hyperplasia impact index is perceptible to patients? J Urol. 1995;154:1770–4.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Coyne KS, Matza LS, Kopp Z, Abrams P. The Validation of the Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC): a single-item global measure for patients with overactive bladder. Eur Urol. 2006;49:1079–86.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Matza LS, Thompson CL, Krasnow J, Brewster-Jordan J, Zyczynski T, Coyne KS. Test-retest reliability of four questionnaires for patients with overactive bladder: the overactive bladder questionnaire (OAB-q), patient perception of bladder condition (PPBC), urgency questionnaire (UQ), and the primary OAB symptom questionnaire (POSQ). Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;24:215–25.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Cartwright R, Srikrishna S, Cardozo L, Robinson D. Validity and reliability of the patient's perception of intensity of urgency scale in overactive bladder. BJU Int. 2011;107:1612–7.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Peterson AC, Chen Y. Patient reported incontinence after radical prostatectomy is more common than expected and not associated with the nerve sparing technique: Results from the center for prostate disease research (CPDR) database. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31:60–3.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bjorner JB, Kosinski M, Ware JE. Computerized adaptive testing and item banking. In: Fayers PM, Hays RD, editors. Assessing quality of life in clinical trials: methods and practice. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005. p. 95–112.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1263–78.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing and questionnaire design: A training manual Hyattsville, MD, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics; 1994.

  43. Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ. Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sung VW, Marques F, Rogers RR, Williams DA, Myers DL, Clark MA. Content validation of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) framework in women with urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:503–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cohen P, Cohen J, Aiken LS, West SG. The problem of units and the circumstance for POMP. Multivar Behav Res. 1999;34:315–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was completed while JW Griffith was a visiting professor at University of Leuven, Belgium, so he gratefully acknowledges the support of his colleagues and home department of Northwestern University, as well as the support of Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO; GP.035.11 N) and the University of Leuven.

Disclosure

The author would like to disclose that his department at Northwestern University is heavily involved in the mentioned NIH PROMIS project. Also discussed in this article is a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) on the creation of a research network focusing on dysfunction of the lower urinary tract. The author, along with others, responded to this FOA with a team at Northwestern University. Finally, mentioned in this article is the Meeting on Measurement of Urinary Symptoms, which was sponsored by the NIDDK. The author attended and presented at this meeting and received financial support from the NIDDK to do so.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, 625 N Michigan Ave, 27th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    James W. Griffith

  2. Center for Learning and Experimental Psychopathology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    James W. Griffith

Authors
  1. James W. Griffith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James W. Griffith.

Additional information

The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is still sometimes referred to as the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUASI). The original AUASI had seven questions that asked about symptoms of LUTS, and one question was added later to address quality of life. In this review, I use IPSS throughout for simplicity.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Griffith, J.W. Self-Report Measurement of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: A Commentary on the Literature Since 2011. Curr Urol Rep 13, 420–426 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-012-0286-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-012-0286-5

Keywords

  • Lower urinary tract symptoms
  • LUTS
  • Self-report measurement
  • Questionnaires
  • Patient reported outcomes
  • PRO