1995•Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaRequires access

Differential diagnosis of detrusor instability and stress‐incontinence by patient history: The Gaudenz‐Incontinence‐Questionnaire revisited

Guenther Haeusler, E. Hanzal, Eva Joura, Christine E. Sam, Heinz Koelbl

Open publisher page 22 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of the Gaudenz-Incontinence-Questionnaire in the differential diagnosis of genuine stress-incontinence and detrusor instability. DESIGN: Diagnoses based on questionnaire-results were compared to those following complete urogynecologic assessment including urodynamics in 1938 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of stress-incontinence were 0.559 and 0.447, respectively, for detrusor instability 0.615 and 0.563, respectively. CONCLUSION: The low sensitivity and specificity of the test do not justify its use as a diagnostic tool in patients with urinary incontinence. These results show that the scores may be misleading in a large proportion of patients and should not therefore be the only determinant of diagnosis, nor should strategies be based on history alone.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of the Gaudenz-Incontinence-Questionnaire in the differential diagnosis of genuine stress-incontinence and detrusor instability. DESIGN: Diagnoses based on questionnaire-results were compared to those following complete urogynecologic assessment including urodynamics in 1938 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of stress-incontinence were 0.559 and 0.447, respectively, for detrusor instability 0.615 and 0.563, respectively. CONCLUSION: The low sensitivity and specificity of the test do not justify its use as a diagnostic tool in patients with urinary incontinence. These results show that the scores may be misleading in a large proportion of patients and should not therefore be the only determinant of diagnosis, nor should strategies be based on history alone.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 22 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of the Gaudenz-Incontinence-Questionnaire in the differential diagnosis of genuine stress-incontinence and detrusor instability. DESIGN: Diagnoses based on questionnaire-results were compared to those following complete urogynecologic assessment including urodynamics in 1938 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of stress-incontinence were 0.559 and 0.447, respectively, for detrusor instability 0.615 and 0.563, respectively. CONCLUSION: The low sensitivity and specificity of the test do not justify its use as a diagnostic tool in patients with urinary incontinence. These results show that the scores may be misleading in a large proportion of patients and should not therefore be the only determinant of diagnosis, nor should strategies be based on history alone.

Key concepts: Medicine, Detrusor instability, Urinary incontinence, Stress incontinence, Medical diagnosis, Differential diagnosis, Urodynamic testing, Urology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Differential diagnosis of detrusor instability and stress‐incontinence by patient history: The Gaudenz‐Incontinence‐Questionnaire revisited — Research Paper | ScholarLens