Relationship between patient report and physician assessment of urinary incontinence severity.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between patient report and physician assessment of urinary incontinence severity and to compare these assessments to a validated severity instrument.


METHODS
A sequential sample of 153 women with urinary incontinence was enrolled over 12 months. Patients completed a detailed health questionnaire that included a medical comorbidity scale, 12-item short-form health survey (SF-12) the incontinence quality of life instrument, the PRIME-MD patient health questionnaire, and a patient incontinence severity assessment. The patient incontinence severity assessment is a single question that asks the patient to rate the severity of her incontinence symptoms on a 5-point Likert scale (range: 1 [mild] to 5 [severe]). After the physicians completed a detailed history, a physical examination, and a review of a 3-day voiding diary, they assigned a physician incontinence severity assessment score. The physician incontinence severity assessment is a physician rating of the severity of the patient's incontinence on a 5-point Likert scale (range: 1 [mild] to 5 [severe]). A validated severity index was computed and used for comparison. This is a multiplicative index that is based on frequency (4 levels) and amount of leakage (2 levels), which yields an index value of 1 to 8. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for patient incontinence severity assessment, the physician incontinence severity assessment scores, and the severity index values. Chi-square tests were used to determine differences between patient incontinence severity assessment and physician incontinence severity assessment ratings.


RESULTS
Spearman correlation coefficients for patient incontinence severity assessment and physician incontinence severity assessment were 0.62 (P <.001), for patient incontinence severity assessment and the severity index was 0.61 (P <.001), and for physician incontinence severity assessment and the severity index was 0.66 (P <.001). Agreement between patient assessment and physician assessment for different severity levels on the patient incontinence severity assessment and physician incontinence severity assessment are provided.


CONCLUSIONS
There is a high correlation between patient report and physician assessment of urinary incontinence severity. Both patient reports (patient incontinence severity assessment) and physician assessments (physician incontinence severity assessment) correlate well with a validated severity index. The agreement between patient and physician ratings is very high for mild incontinence but decreases as incontinence severity progresses.
Melville
Jennifer L
JL
Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington Medical Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington 98195-6460, USA.
Miller
Elizabeth A
EA
Fialkow
Michael F
MF
Lentz
Gretchen M
GM
Miller
Jane L
JL
Fenner
Dee E
DE
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D010465:Perception; D011788:Quality of Life; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014549:Urinary Incontinence / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000503:physiopathology