ESPUNA PONS, M.; CASTRO DIAZ, D.; CARBONELL, C.    DILLA, T.. Comparison between the "ICIQ-UI Short Form" questionnaire and the "King's Health Questionnaire" as assessment tools of urinary incontinence among women. []. , 31, 5, pp.502-510. ISSN 0210-4806.

Introduction: In our country there are a few available instruments to diagnose urinary incontinence (UI) from the patient's perspective. The King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) and the "International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form" (ICIQ-UI SF) are the most widespread among that. The present study aimed to compare the clinical utility between KHQ and ICIQ-UI SF with regard to the urodynamic test. Material and Methods: Cross-sectional study performed in 116 women who completed the ICIQ-UI SF, the KHQ and the urodynamic test and were diagnosed according to each test. Sensibility and specificity values of symptom dimension of the ICIQUI SF and the KHQ were analyzed with regard to the urodynamic test. In addition, correlation scores between the both compared measures were calculated. Results: Mean age (SD) of women was 54 years (SD= 13.99). KHQ and ICIQ-UI SF mean scores were 39.93 (22.11) and 13.76 (4.11), respectively. Correlation between both measures was moderated (r= 0.6; p<0.001). Percentages of pts with symptoms suggesting Stress UI (SUI), Urge UI (UUI) and Mixed UI (MUI) according to each instrument were: 33.7, 17.3 & 49 (KHQ); 40.4, 15.4 & 44.2 (ICIQ-UI SF). Patients' distribution according to urodynamic test was: SUI 41.3%, UUI 20.2%, MUI 26.9% and 11.5% with other diagnosis. Sensibility and specificity values of both questionnaires were very similar, but feasibility was worse for the KHQ (7.76% of pts did not complete the questionnaire) than for the ICIQ-UI SF (2.59% did not complete the questionnaire). Conclusions: Because of its better feasibility, clinical use of ICIQ-UI SF is recommended against KHQ for UI evaluation.

: Urinary incontinence; Diagnostic; Questionnaires.

        · |     · |     · ( pdf )