Urodynamic tests for female geriatricurinary incontinence

Abstract

Most urodynamic tests currently in use in the evaluation of female urinary incontinence have not been applied to a community-based sample to determine their specificity. In this study of a random sample of noninstitutionalized elderly, 258 self-reported continent and 198 self-reported incontinent women sixty years and older, who participated in a household survey, underwent a clinic evaluation (history, physical examination, and urinalysis); of these, 67 continent and 100 incontinent female respondents underwent urodynamic testing. The uroflowmetry, cystometry, and supine static urethral pressure profilometry (UPP) findings did not differ significantly between continent and incontinent subjects (whether based on a self-report or a clinician's diagnosis of urinary continence status). Standing static and dynamic UPP and lateral eystography showed significant differences between self-reported continent and incontinent respondents. The provocative stress test significantly distinguishes continence from incontinence, and stress incontinence from other types. The sensitivity of the provocative stress test was 39.5 percent, whereas its specificity is 98.5 percent. Urodynamic testing including uroflow study, static UPP, and lateral eystography should not be used as a screening test but rather selectively as a confirmatory test, and to determine the therapeutic approach, and to assess the outcome of therapy.