Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validity and reliability of two Danish versions of the ICIQ-UI SF

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We aimed to assess the validity and reliability of two Danish versions of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) in a female population. We hypothesized that the questionnaires had good predictive validity, internal consistency, patient-physician agreement, construct validity, test-retest reliability, and sensitivity to change.

Methods

To test the predictive validity, we compared the ICIQ-UI SF to urodynamics (n = 153). The same answers were used for testing the internal consistency. The patient-physician agreement was assessed by comparing the self-administered questionnaire with a physician’s evaluation based on telephone interviews (n = 60). To test the construct validity, we calculated the proportion of scores ≥ 1 in questionnaires completed by women defining themselves as “not suffering from involuntary urination” (n = 69). Test-retest reliability was assessed by comparing questionnaires completed twice with an interval of 2 weeks (n = 186). Sensitivity to change was evaluated by analyzing answers before and after treatment for women treated surgically for stress urinary incontinence (n = 755) and with botulinum type A toxin for overactive bladder (n = 63).

Results

Predictive validity: 26.6–27.6% agreement. Internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha: 0.7–0.8. Patient-physician agreement: 53.9–92.9% agreement. Some interview participants misunderstood the word “leak.” Construct validity: 19% and 23% had a total score ≥ 1. Test-retest reliability: 77.0–95.7% agreement. Sensitivity to change: Significantly lower score after treatment.

Conclusion

The ICIQ-UI SF had excellent internal consistency, patient-physician agreement, test-retest reliability, and sensitivity to change. The ICIQ-UI SF had questionable predictive validity and construct validity compared to urodynamic testing. We recommend precaution in diagnostics or research based solely on the questionnaire.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schreiber Pedersen L, Lose G, Hoybye MT, Elsner S, Waldmann A, Rudnicki M. Prevalence of urinary incontinence among women and analysis of potential risk factors in Germany and Denmark. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(8):939–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Krhut J, Gartner M, Mokris J, Horcicka L, Svabik K, Zachoval R, et al. Effect of severity of urinary incontinence on quality of life in women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(6):1925–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coyne KS, Kvasz M, Ireland AM, Milsom I, Kopp ZS, Chapple CR. Urinary incontinence and its relationship to mental health and health-related quality of life in men and women in Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Eur Urol. 2012;61(1):88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.07.049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(4):322–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. International Consultation on Incontinence (2014–2021) International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF). https://iciq.net/iciq-ui-sf. Accessed 04 Dec 2020.

  6. Jepsen R, Egholm CL, Brodersen J, Simonsen E, Grarup J, Cyron A, et al. Lolland-Falster Health Study: Study protocol for a household-based prospective cohort study. Scand J Public Health. 2020;48(4):382–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494818799613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60 (1):34–42. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.

  8. Rosier P, Schaefer W, Lose G, Goldman HB, Guralnick M, Eustice S, et al. International Continence Society good urodynamic practices and terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure-flow study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(5):1243–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. van Leijsen SA, Hoogstad-van Evert JS, Mol BW, Vierhout ME, Milani AL, Heesakkers JP, et al. The correlation between clinical and urodynamic diagnosis in classifying the type of urinary incontinence in women. A systematic review of the literature. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(4):495–502. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.21047.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Colli E, Artibani W, Goka J, Parazzini F, Wein AJ. Are urodynamic tests useful tools for the initial conservative management of non-neurogenic urinary incontinence? A review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2003;43(1):63–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0302-2838(02)00494-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hripcsak G, Heitjan DF. Measuring agreement in medical informatics reliability studies. J Biomed Inform. 2002;35(2):99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1532-0464(02)00500-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. De Vet H, Terwee C, Mokkink L, Knol D. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide (Practical Guides to Biostatistics and Epidemiology). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511996214.

  13. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(2):167–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.10052.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Espuna-Pons M, Dilla T, Castro D, Carbonell C, Casariego J, Puig-Clota M. Analysis of the value of the ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire and stress test in the differential diagnosis of the type of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(6):836–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rotar M, Trsinar B, Kisner K, Barbic M, Sedlar A, Gruden J, et al. Correlations between the ICIQ-UI short form and urodynamic diagnosis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(6):501–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20689.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hajebrahimi S, Nourizadeh D, Hamedani R, Pezeshki MZ. Validity and reliability of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-urinary incontinence short form and its correlation with urodynamic findings. Urol J. 2012;9(4):685–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hashim H, Avery K, Mourad MS, Chamssuddin A, Ghoniem G, Abrams P. The Arabic ICIQ-UI SF: an alternative language version of the English ICIQ-UI SF. Neurourol Urodyn. 2006;25(3):277–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20212.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Huang L, Zhang SW, Wu SL, Ma L, Deng XH. The Chinese version of ICIQ: a useful tool in clinical practice and research on urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(6):522–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gotoh M, Homma Y, Funahashi Y, Matsukawa Y, Kato M. Psychometric validation of the Japanese version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-short form. Int J Urol. 2009;16(3):303–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02237.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Al-Shaikh G, Al-Badr A, Al Maarik A, Cotterill N, Al-Mandeel HM. Reliability of Arabic ICIQ-UI short form in Saudi Arabia. Urol Ann. 2013;5(1):34–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.106964.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Tubaro A, Zattoni F, Prezioso D, Scarpa RM, Pesce F, Rizzi CA, et al. Italian validation of the International Consultation on Incontinence questionnaires. BJU Int. 2006;97(1):101–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.05885.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Moller LA, Lose G, Jorgensen T. Incidence and remission rates of lower urinary tract symptoms at one year in women aged 40-60: longitudinal study. BMJ. 2000;320(7247):1429–32. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7247.1429.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Uren AD, Cotterill N, Parke SE, Abrams P. Psychometric equivalence of electronic and telephone completion of the ICIQ modules. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(5):1342–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43(6):543–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-l.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Klovning A, Avery K, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S. Comparison of two questionnaires for assessing the severity of urinary incontinence: the ICIQ-UI SF versus the incontinence severity index. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(5):411–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20674.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lim R, Liong ML, Lau YK, Yuen KH. Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the ICIQ-UI SF and ICIQ-LUTSqol in the Malaysian population. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(2):438–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22950.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chang SR, Chen KH, Chang TC, Lin HH. A Taiwanese version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire—urinary incontinence short form for pregnant women: instrument validation. J Clin Nurs. 2011;20(5–6):714–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03364.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nitti VW, Dmochowski R, Herschorn S, Sand P, Thompson C, Nardo C, et al. OnabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of patients with overactive bladder and urinary incontinence: results of a phase 3, randomized, placebo controlled trial. J Urol. 2017;197(2S):S216–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.109.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Drake MJ, Nitti VW, Ginsberg DA, Brucker BM, Hepp Z, McCool R, et al. Comparative assessment of the efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA and oral therapies (anticholinergics and mirabegron) for overactive bladder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2017;120(5):611–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13945.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the extensive work involved in urodynamic testing at the Gynecological Department at Nykøbing Falster Hospital.

The Lolland-Falster Health Study (LOFUS), Nykøbing Falster Hospital, Denmark, is a collaboration between Region Zealand, Nykøbing Falster Hospital, and Lolland and Guldborgsund Municipalities. The authors are grateful to LOFUS for making the LOFUS research data available. However, LOFUS bears no responsibility for the analysis or the interpretation conducted within this study.

We appreciate the recruitment of women treated with botulinum type A toxin done by the Gynecological Department and the Day Surgery Unit at Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde.

Funding

This study was supported by fundings from The Danish Urogynecology Society (DUGS) and the Region Zealand Health Research Fund.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark

    Josephine Clausen & Helga Gimbel

  2. Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Helga Gimbel & Ea Løwenstein

  3. Centre for Clinical Research, North Denmark Regional Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark

    Louise Thomsen Schmidt Arenholt

  4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North Denmark Regional Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark

    Louise Thomsen Schmidt Arenholt

  5. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

    Louise Thomsen Schmidt Arenholt

  6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nykøbing Falster Hospital, Nykøbing Falster, Denmark

    Ea Løwenstein

Authors
  1. Josephine Clausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helga Gimbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Louise Thomsen Schmidt Arenholt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ea Løwenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josephine Clausen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 509 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 584 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clausen, J., Gimbel, H., Arenholt, L.T.S. et al. Validity and reliability of two Danish versions of the ICIQ-UI SF. Int Urogynecol J 32, 3223–3233 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04712-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04712-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation