Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

EuroQol EQ-5D and condition-specific measures of health outcome in women with urinary incontinence: reliability, validity and responsiveness

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the measurement properties of the EuroQoL EQ-5D and two condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures—the Symptom Severity Index (SSI) and the Urinary Incontinence-Specific Quality of Life instrument (I-QoL)—in women with urinary incontinence.

Methods

A questionnaire comprising all instruments was completed by women taking part in a clinical trial of physiotherapy for urinary incontinence. Follow-up questionnaires were at 6 weeks and 5 months. Data quality, internal consistency reliability, validity and responsiveness were assessed.

Results

One hundred and seventy-four patients taking part in the clinical trial completed the questionnaire. Instruments had low levels of missing data. The EQ-5D had a large ceiling effect and poor responsiveness. The SSI had poor validity and responsiveness. The I-QoL had levels of reliability that supported application in group assessment, and in some cases, individual assessment, and good evidence of validity. The I-QoL was the most responsive instrument at both 6 weeks and 5 months.

Conclusion

The I-QoL was the best performing instrument and is recommended as a continence-specific measure of quality of life in a clinical trial setting. The SSI and EQ-5D are not recommended. Alternative generic instruments, which support economic evaluation, require further evaluation in trials of female urinary incontinence.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Norton, N. J. (2004). The perspective of the patient. Gastroenterology, 126, S175–S179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miner, P. B., Jr. (2004). Economic and personal impact of fecal and urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S8–S13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Martin, J. L., Williams, K. S., Abrams, K. R., et al. (2006). Systematic review and evaluation of methods of assessing urinary incontinence. Health Technology Assessment, 10(6), 1–132.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Abrams, P., Cardozo, L., Fall, M., Griffiths, D., Rosier, P., et al. (2002). The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: Report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 21, 167–178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., & Jones, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 2(i–iv), 1–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ross, S., Soroka, D., Karahalios, A., Glazener, C. M., Hay-Smith, E. J., & Drutz, H. P. (2005). Incontinence-specific quality of life measures used in trials of treatments for female urinary incontinence: A systematic review. International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, 17(3), 272–285.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Naughton, M. J., Donovan, J., Badia, X., Corcos, J., Gotoh, M., et al. (2004). Symptom severity and QOL scales for urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S114–S123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Symonds, T. (2003). A review of condition-specific instruments to assess the impact of urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life. European Urology, 43, 219–225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. EuroQoL-Group. (1990). EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy, 16, 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., & Busschbach, J. (2004). A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Economics, 13, 873–884.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wiebe, S., Guyatt, G., Weaver, B., Matijevic, S., & Sidwell, C. (2003). Comparative responsiveness of generic and specific quality-of-life instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 52–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network. (2004). SIGN 79: Management of urinary incontinence in primary care. A national clinical guideline. Edinburgh: Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network.

  13. Department-of-Health. (2000). Good practice in continence services, UK. Department of Health. www.doh.gov.uk/continenceservices.htm.

  14. Lose, G., Fantl, J. A., Victor, A., Walter, S., Wells, T. L., et al. (2001). Outcome measures for research in adult women with symptoms of lower urinary tract dysfunction. Standardization Committee of the International Continence Society. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavia, 80, 981–985.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Garratt, A., Schmidt, L., Mackintosh, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2002). Quality of life measurement: Bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. British Medical Journal, 324, 1417.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Black, N., Griffiths, J., & Pope, C. (1996). Development of a symptom severity index and a symptom impact index for stress incontinence in women. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 15, 630–640.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Wagner, T. H., Patrick, D. L., Bavendam, T. G., Martin, M. L., & Buesching, D. P. (1996). Quality of life of persons with urinary incontinence: Development of a new measure. Urology, 47, 67–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Patrick, D. L., Martin, M. L., Bushnell, D. M., Yalcin, I., Wagner, T. H., & Buesching, D. P. (1999). Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: Further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I-QOL). Urology, 53, 71–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Black, N., Griffiths, J., Pope, C., Bowling, A., & Abel P. (1997). Impact of surgery for stress incontinence on morbidity: Cohort study. British Medical Journal, 315, 1493–1498.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bushnell, D. M., Martin, M. L., Summers, K. H., Svihra, J., Lionis, C., & Patrick, D. L. (2005). Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: Cross-cultural performance of 15 language versions of the I-QOL. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1901–1913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Marra, C. A., Woolcott, J. C., Kopec, J. A., Shojania, K., Offer, R., et al. (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Social Science and Medicine, 60, 1571–1582.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Donovan, J. L., Kay, H. E., Peters, T. J., Abrams, P., Coast, J., et al. (1997). Using the ICSOoL to measure the impact of lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life: Evidence from the ICS-‘BPH’ Study. International Continence Society–Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. British Journal of Urology, 80, 712–721.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kobelt, G. (1997). Economic considerations and outcome measurement in urge incontinence. Urology, 50, 100–7; discussion 8–10.

  24. Fuertes, M. E., Garcia Matres, M. J., Gonzalez Romojaro, V., de la Rosa, S., Anguera Vila, A., et al. (2000). Clinical trial to evaluate trospium chloride (Uraplex) effectiveness and tolerance in patients with detrusor instability incontinence and its impact on quality of life. Archivos Españoles de Urologia, 53, 125–136.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hawthorne, G. (2006). Measuring incontinence in Australia 2006 (153 pp). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. ISBN: 0 642 82980 2. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/ageing-continence-measure.htm

  26. Streiner, D., & Norman, G. (2003). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Jolliffe, I. (1986). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Shrout, P., & Fleiss, J. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hawthorne, G., Richardson, J., & Osborne, R. (1999). The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 8, 209–224.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis: With readings (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to all of the patients who so willingly gave of their time to complete the various questionnaires, and the healthcare practitioners taking part in the trial. This study was funded by the Physiotherapy Research Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, School of Health and Social Studies, Warwick University, Coventry, CV4 5AL, UK

    Kirstie L. Haywood

  2. Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, 0317, Oslo, Norway

    Andrew M. Garratt

  3. Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Health Science Research Institute, Warwick Medical School, Warwick University, Coventry, CV4 5AL, UK

    Ranjit Lall & Sarah E. Lamb

  4. South Warwickshire General Hospitals NHS Trust, Lakin Road, Warwick, CV34 5BW, UK

    Jan Fereday Smith

Authors
  1. Kirstie L. Haywood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew M. Garratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ranjit Lall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan Fereday Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sarah E. Lamb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirstie L. Haywood.

Additional information

On behalf of the West Midlands Incontinence Research Collaboration.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haywood, K.L., Garratt, A.M., Lall, R. et al. EuroQol EQ-5D and condition-specific measures of health outcome in women with urinary incontinence: reliability, validity and responsiveness. Qual Life Res 17, 475–483 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9311-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9311-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation