Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T10:05:14.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 1 - Pre-test Assessment of Urinary Dysfunction, Using Patient-Centred Questionnaires

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2020

Ranee Thakar
Affiliation:
Croydon University Hospital
Philip Toozs-Hobson
Affiliation:
Birmingham Women’s Hospital
Lucia Dolan
Affiliation:
Belfast City Hospital
Get access

Summary

Patient-centred questionnaires and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are terms that are used interchangeably to reflect an instrument that provides evaluation of the lived experience of symptoms from the patients’ perspective. PRO use has grown significantly in the past 10–15 years, due to recognition of the importance of placing patients at the centre of their care [1]. It is recognised that only those individuals experiencing symptoms can report on the more subjective elements [2]. This is particularly important in the case of urodynamics, which is a clinical test. PROs provide a method of measuring subjective phenomena in an objective way and provide context to the data provided by clinical measurements. PROs can be used to record the presence and severity of symptoms and also to measure their impact, in particular on quality of life. This is useful when interpreting patients’ priorities for treatment and understanding the most bothersome aspect of their symptoms.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Castro-Diaz, D, Robinson, D, Bosch, R, et al. Patient-reported outcome assessment. Incontinence: Proceedings of the Sixth International Consultation on Incontinence, Tokyo, September 2016. Plymouth: Health Publications Limited; 2017: 541670.Google Scholar
Streiner, DL, Norman, GR, Cairney, J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford University Press; 2014:415.Google Scholar
Donovan, J, Bosch, R, Gotoh, M, et al. Symptom and quality of life assessment. Incontinence: Proceedings of the Third International Consultation on Incontinence, Paris, June 2004. Plymouth: Health Publications Limited; 2005:519–84.Google Scholar
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for Industry Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims; 2014.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, A. Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. 2nd edition. London: Continnuum-3PL; 1998:312.Google Scholar
Patrick, DL, Burke, LB, Gwaltney, CJ, et al. Content validity – establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1 – eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2011;14:967–77.Google Scholar
Abrams, P, Avery, K, Gardener, N, Donovan, J, ICIQ Advisory Board. The International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire: www.iciq.net. J Urol. 2006;175:1063–6; discussion 1066.Google Scholar
Bright, E, Cotterill, N, Drake, M, Abrams, P. Developing a validated urinary diary: phase 1. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31:625–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bright, E, Cotterill, N, Drake, M, Abrams, P. Developing and validating the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire bladder diary. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):294300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Urinary incontinence in women: management. NICE Guideline (CG171); 2013.Google Scholar
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of urinary incontinence in primary care; 2004.Google Scholar
Uren, AD, Cotterill, N, Parke, SE, Abrams, P. Psychometric equivalence of electronic and telephone completion of the ICIQ modules. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;36:13421349.Google Scholar
Abrams, P, Cardozo, L, Wagg, A, Wein, A. Incontinence: Proceedings of the Sixth International Consultation on Incontinence, Tokyo, 2016. Plymouth: Health Publications Limited; 2017.Google Scholar
Jones, GL, Radley, SC, Lumb, J, Farkas, A. Responsiveness of the electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor (ePAQ-PF). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009;20:557–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×