HomeLarge Type Edition
HOME ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 55:M207-M214 (2000)
© 2000 The Gerontological Society of America

Prevalence and Psychosocial Impact of Urinary Incontinence in Older People of a Spanish Rural Population

F.J. Gavira Iglesiasa, J.M. Caridad y Ocerínb, J. Pérez del Molino Martínc, E. Valderrama Gamad, M. López Péreze, M. Romero Lópeze, M.V. Pavón Arangurene and J.B. Guerrero Muñoze

a Health Center of Cabra, Córdoba, Spain
b Department of Statistics, University of Córdoba, Spain
c Geriatrics Unit, University Hospital, Guadalajara, Spain
d Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, National School of Health, Madrid, Spain
e Association of Health Districts of Southern Córdoba, Spain

F.J. Gavira Iglesias, Urbanizaci\|[oacute]\|n Los Poleares, 23, 14900 Lucena, C\|[oacute]\|rdoba, Spain E-mail: med015490{at}nacom.es.

Decision Editor: William B. Ershler, MD


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Background. The prevalence and the psychosocial impact of urinary incontinence in older people of a rural population were investigated.

Methods. A cross-sectional study was made by means of a home health interview in a representative sample of people aged 65 years and older in the Basic Health Zone of Cabra (Córdoba). A questionnaire was used with two questions to detect urinary incontinence and further questions regarding its duration, frequency, volume, severity and psychosocial impact. Data were analyzed with basic statistics. A logistic regression model was created to identify which factors affect people's lifestyles.

Results. Among the 827 respondents the prevalence of incontinence reached 36% [95% confidence interval (CI): 34%–38%] and was higher (p < .001) in women (42%; 95% CI: 39%–45%) than in men (29%; 95% CI: 25%–38%). The most frequent duration of incontinence was from 1 to 5 years (16.8%). Fifteen percent had daily episodes and 10.6% estimated the volume of urine loss as high. Incontinence was severe in 9% of the affected subjects. Half the incontinent subjects expressed social limitations and negative feelings related to incontinence, and 21% admitted that incontinence negatively affected their lives. In the logistic regression model, both volume of urine loss and being married were the factors statistically associated with a negative influence of incontinence on lifestyle.

Conclusions. Urinary incontinence is a very frequent symptom in our population. Half the incontinent subjects suffer from some degree of psychosocial limitation. The volume of urine loss and being married are the most important factors with psychosocial impact.

URINARY incontinence is a frequent health problem and a significant cause of disability and dependence in the older population. In community-residing subjects, prevalence rates ranging from 5% to 54% have been reported (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). These figures show great variations that are explained partly by the lack of uniformity in the definition of urinary incontinence, the period of time considered when incontinence was recorded (now as opposed to within the previous 2 or 12 months), the type of population studied (excluding or not subjects in nursing homes), and the methodology used (postal questionnaires as opposed to personal interviews) (7)(8).

Important consequences of incontinence on physical and psychological health and social relations of the sufferers have been described (2)(4)(6)(9)(10).

In Spain one previous epidemiological study (11) has been carried out on the prevalence and characteristics of incontinence in the elderly residing in the community. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the prevalence, duration, severity, and psychosocial impact of urinary incontinence in an elderly rural population.


    Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
This observational cross-sectional study was carried out in June and July, 1996, by means of a home interview in the Basic Health Zone of Cabra, located in southern Spain and made up of the municipal districts of Cabra, Doña Mencía and Nueva Carteya. The target population of the study was people aged >=65 years (16.5% of a total population of 5,139 subjects according to the Municipal Census of 1991). People institutionalized in nursing homes were not excluded.

To perfect the questionnaire and estimate sample size, we first conducted a pilot study on a nonproportional random sample of 5% of the 5,139 subjects , assigning a third of the sample to each of the three age strata (65–74, 75–84, and >=85 years). This distribution was selected to include all or most of the subjects pertaining to the oldest groups. Once prevalence data by age group were known from the pilot study, we obtained the final size of each age group by interviewing the required number of subjects after considering those already included in the pilot study. The final sample size and stratification by age groups was determined to estimate the prevalence with a precision of ±3% and a confidence interval (CI) of 95%.

A letter was sent to each individual 1 week before the interview. If the selected person was hospitalized, the interview took place 30 days after discharge. Three interviewers specifically trained for the study (one male general physician and two female nurses), who were members of Basic Health Zone where the study was carried out, collected study data. A caregiver or relative was allowed to attend the interview. In the case of subjects suffering from deafness, aphasia, or cognitive dysfunction, the information from the caregiver was considered valid and the questions about psychosocial impact were not asked.

Two questions were used to detect urinary incontinence: "Do you ever have involuntary or unexpected leakages of urine without being able to control them?" and "Do you ever wet or dampen your underwear, clothes, or bedclothes against your will?" We defined incontinence as a positive response to either of the two questions and/or the use of an urethral catheter (8)(12) or absorbent pads. We did not attempt to identify the type of incontinence. Only incontinent people completed the rest of the questionnaire. The duration of urinary incontinence was measured in intervals (less than 1 month, 1–12 months, 1–5 years, and more than 5 years). Severity of incontinence was graded with the Sandvik Scale (12), which is created by multiplying the reported frequency by the volume of the urine leakages. The resulting index value (from 1 to 8) was further categorized into slight (1 or 2), moderate (3 to 4), and severe (6 to 8). Consequently, severe incontinence means larger amounts at least once a week.

We evaluated psychosocial impact by asking subjects how important the leakages were, how they felt about them, what effect the bladder problems had on their lifestyle, what social restrictions were caused by incontinence (6), and what was the worst effect on their life (13).

The questionnaire was complemented by sociodemographic and functional information. The latter was evaluated with the Barthel index (BI) modified by Shah and colleagues (14), from which we excluded the urinary continence item, so that the maximum score was 90 points. The subjects were classified under total independence , moderate dependence , severe dependence and total dependence (BI <= 20).

The data were analyzed with the BMDP and EViews statistical programs. Basic statistics were computed (average and standard deviation for quantitative data and percentages for qualitative data). Two logistic regression models were elaborated: one to estimate incontinence prevalence according to age and sex and another to detect risk factors for an adverse impact of incontinence on the lifestyle of incontinent subjects. Because of the sampling format used, weighting factors were applied to reestablish proportionality in each age group according to their real size within the general population, when expressing overall results. Estimation of the proportion p of urinary incontinence must take into account the experimental design used: nonproportional stratified sampling in three age groups; let be the population size, the number of persons in each age strata, and the respective sample sizes. The overall estimator of p is

where xi is the number of subjects affected in the i age groups.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Of a total sample of 1,006 people, 3 were excluded because of errors in the census, 21 because of a definitive change of address outside the zone, and 113 because of death. Of 869 eligible subjects, 34 were not found after two visits to their home and 8 refused to participate. A total of 827 subjects were interviewed, accounting for 95% of eligible subjects. In 66% of the cases the subject alone responded to the questionnaire, in 31% the help of a relative or caregiver was necessary, and in the remaining 3% the responses were given by a relative or caregiver.

The most notable sociodemographic and functional characteristics of the sample are the large proportion of widowed women, the high percentage of illiterate or uneducated people, the low number of people institutionalized in nursing homes, and the high prevalence of moderate dependence in self-care (Table 1 ).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Sociodemographic and Functional Characteristics of the Subjects

 
The overall prevalence of incontinence reached 36% (95% CI: 34%–38%), and was greater (p < .001) in women (42%; 95% CI: 39%–45%) than in men (29%; 95% CI: 25%–38%). Urethral catheters were used by 2.3% of men and 0.2% of women. Only 1.5% of the incontinent subjects lived in nursing homes.

The prevalence of incontinence by age groups (Fig. 1) was greater in women than in men, with the exception of the 75- to 79-year-old and >=90-year-old age groups, in which it is similar. There is an average prevalence increase of 5% per 5-year interval (approximately 1% per year of age). A significantly higher average prevalence was observed in women compared with that in men .



View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Distribution of urinary incontinence prevalence in men and women according to age groups.

 
The logit model used for the estimation of urinary incontinence according to age and sex is described in Fig. 2 (see legend) and shows a close to linear relationship in each gender between incontinence and age, as well as a higher prevalence in women at each age point.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Logistic model for the estimation of urinary incontinence prevalence in function of age and sex.

UI=+e,

where for subjects with incontinence and for those without incontinence. The z statistics for the model coefficients were -6.21, 4.81, and 3.36, all of them with p < .001. The Akaike information criteria was 1.306.

 
Table 2 shows the characteristics of urinary incontinence. The most frequent duration of incontinence was from 1 to 5 years (16.8%), and only four people (0.6%) reported a duration of less than a month. Of the subjects, 165 (15.4%) reported daily urine leakages, 8.3% weekly, 6.3% monthly, and 6% occasionally. Of the subjects, 10.6% reported their leakages as "a lot." Frequency and volume increased with age (p < .01), whereas differences between genders were not found.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Prevalence and Characteristics of Urinary Incontinence According to Gender

 
Fig. 3 shows the distribution of incontinence severity by gender and age groups. Of the incontinent subjects, 22% had severe incontinence (9% of the population), 45% had moderate (16% of the population), and 33% had a slight incontinence (11% of the population). In men the percentage of slight incontinence is constant up to 90 years of age; the percentage of moderate incontinence is stable over the years with peaks during the 75–79-year and 90-year-or-older periods; and the proportion of severe incontinence, which is lower than 6% up to the age of 80 years, progressively increases to reach 28% at 90 years of age. In women the proportion of slight incontinence decreases as a function of age; the percentage of moderate incontinence is stable around 15%, whereas severe incontinence increases over the years with a peak of 21% between 70 and 74 years of age and reaches 40% in subjects older than 90 years of age. Positive associations between severity of incontinence and female gender or older age groups (p < .01) were detected.



View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Distribution of urinary incontinence level of severity by gender and age groups. An association (p = .02) between the severity of incontinence and gender was detected.

 
The psychosocial impact of incontinence could not be evaluated in 34 incontinent subjects (29 with severe incontinence), as they did not respond to the questionnaire themselves. Of the 296 evaluated subjects, 23% perceived their urine leakages as quite or very important and only 10% admitted that incontinence had quite a lot or a lot of effect on their lifestyle (Table 3 ). Approximately half of the subjects reported negative feelings and suffered social restrictions derived from their urine leakages. The aspects of incontinence that most affected their lives were the continual changing of underwear (20%), feeling wet (19%), and the necessity to go frequently to the bathroom (18%); 35% did not report any practical inconveniences. The impact was notably greater in subjects with severe incontinence. We did not find differences between genders.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Psychosocial Impact of Urinary Incontinence According to Gender

 
Table 4 shows the determinant variables that subjectively affect the incontinent subjects' lifestyles. In the bivariate analysis, large leakage volume [odds ratio , daily frequency of leakages and duration of incontinence greater than 5 years were significantly associated with adverse effects on the lifestyles of incontinent subjects. Age, gender, and marital status were not associated with the adverse effects of incontinence. In the multivariate analysis, the relation between an adverse impact of incontinence and being married reached statistical significance and the relation with leakage volume was similar in magnitude to that found in the bivariate analysis. Independent people in self-care or those with slight disability showed a greater impact of incontinence on their lifestyle according to multivariate analysis .


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 4. Risk Factors for an Adverse Impact of Incontinence on Lifestyle of Subjects

 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The present investigation is the second epidemiological survey in Spain specifically designed to study the prevalence of incontinence in the elderly. The considerable number of illiterate people, the high response rate, the high prevalence of incontinence in all age groups, and the minimal psychosocial impact, except in people with severe incontinence, are notable features of our study, which was carried out by health professionals well acquainted with the setting and most of the subjects to be interviewed.

The previous Spanish study (11) was carried out in 1996 in both male and female subjects >=65 years of age, with a similar sampling format and home interview. In contrast to our study, their survey was performed by non–health care interviewers and included only one question to detect incontinence. The population studied was urban and excluded institutionalized elderly. The response rate was 71%, and the overall prevalence reached 15.5%; no difference was seen between genders.

Few population surveys have determined the prevalence of incontinence in the elderly of both sexes (7)(15). Previous studies show variations in prevalence levels (1)(2)(3)(4)(6)(7)(15) that are in some cases explained by the different criteria used for diagnosis of incontinence (7)(15). Other studies, which introduce restrictions in the definition of incontinence (2)(6), show a clearly lower prevalence of urinary incontinence. The prevalence level in our population was 36% and is similar to that (30%) observed by Diokno and colleagues (3), who also used a broad definition of incontinence as well as two questions to identify urinary incontinence, a tool that probably allows slight or moderate incontinence to be detected in contrast to surveys that include only a single question (1)(4)(5)(6)(11). The slightly higher prevalence rates recorded in our study compared with the data of Diokno and colleagues could be due to several factors, such as the inclusion of older subjects, the higher response rate, and the presence of relatives in 31% of the interviews who reduced the probability of hiding the problem and allowed more dependent people to be included.

We found that prevalence was 1.4 times higher in women than in men. As in other studies (1)(3)(6), the difference in incontinence prevalence rates between women and men diminishes or disappears toward the end of life. In summary, our prevalence data in men and women are within the range found by Thom (15) and further evaluated by Hampel and colleagues through meta-analysis (7) in population-based studies carried out by personal interviews.

As in other studies of elderly populations (2)(4), the prevalence of incontinence increased with age. Women from 75 to 79 years of age are an exception in that the prevalence decreased significantly, a finding that has been previously pointed out (2) and might reflect the natural progression of stress-related incontinence, which diminishes in women of advanced age (2)(15)(16)(17).

In contrast with other reviewed studies (15), in our study we found a high incidence (15.4%) of daily incontinence, especially in men (13.7%), in whom the condition might be related to prostatic disorders.

Despite the lack of agreement on the definition of severe incontinence, its prevalence is consistent among published studies (7)(8)(18). Severe incontinence was seen in 9% of our subjects, a prevalence that falls within the range considered reasonable for elderly subjects (5%–12% of subjects) (7)(8)(18).

The International Continence Society definition of urinary incontinence (involuntary loss of urine, which is objectively demonstrable and causes a social or hygienic problem) (19) adds dimensions of severity and consequences to the phenomenon of involuntary loss of urine. The emotional distress, social restrictions, and practical inconveniences caused by incontinence are thus part of its definition. However, when the International Continence Society's definition is used, the prevalence of incontinence may be substantially reduced. In our study, only 10% of the evaluated subjects considered that incontinence significantly affected their lives and only a quarter perceived the problem as being quite or very important; 43% reported psychological distress, over half reported restrictions in relation to incontinence, and 65% admitted some practical inconvenience.

Brocklehurst (6) carried out a study in the UK comparable with ours from a methodological point of view (cross-sectional survey, men and women over 30 years of age, personal interview). The psychosocial impact of incontinence seems to affect a lower proportion of our subjects compared with those of Brocklehurst in terms of incontinence perceived as important/very important (23% vs 35%), important effect on lifestyle (10% vs 36%), and psychological distress (43% vs 60%), but social restrictions were higher in our population (52% vs 45%).

On the other hand, our subjects were more affected in relation to concrete aspects of the psychosocial impact (feelings, social restrictions, and practical inconveniences) than to its generic aspects (the importance the subject gives to incontinence and the general effect on his or her lifestyle). Nevertheless, the real importance of the problem could be underestimated in our study because of some degree of occultation by the patient of the consequences of incontinence and the facts that psychosocial impact was not measured in 34 patients and that study methodology allowed for the detection of a great number of slight incontinence sufferers. In agreement with Mitteness (20) we suspect that the low cultural level and resigned or fatalistic attitudes of our population ("the belief that urine losses are the result of aging and nothing can be done about them") may explain the apparently low concern of our subjects about incontinence. However, these observations prompt us to underline the complexity of evaluating the different spheres considered within the quality-of-life concept in incontinent subjects.

According to the multivariable analysis, the volume (not frequency) of urine losses and being married were variables significantly associated with the impact of incontinence on the quality of life of the affected subjects (21)(22)(23).

Some limitations of the study should be taken into consideration when our results are interpreted. First, objective checks of the presence of incontinence or measurements of its frequency and volume were not performed. Nevertheless, there is evidence that the prevalence of incontinence defined by objective measurements differs very little from that found by means of a questionnaire (9)(18). Second, we did not estimate the interviewer to interviewer consistency on the subject's responses. However, our interviewers did go through a common training process on the evaluation system to be followed during the interview.

Primary care professionals should include specific questions about incontinence when assessing older patients and, once diagnosed, determine the severity and type of incontinence, and finally ensure, either personally or through specialized units, that appropriate care and follow-up are given to the patient.


    Acknowledgments
 
This work was financed by funds from the Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria Sanitary Research Fund; Project 97/0160, the CajaSur Savings Bank, and the Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology. An abstract presentation was made on June 12, 1998, in Madrid during the XXIInd National Congress of the Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology. The authors are grateful to René Lardinois for his valuable comments and to José A. Montes Montes for excellent secretarial assistance.

Received March 8, 1999

Accepted August 29, 1999


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Thomas M, Plymat KR, Blannin J, Meade TW, 1980. Prevalence of urinary incontinence. Br Med J. 281:1243-1246.
  2. Campbell AJ, Reinken J, McCossh L, 1985. Incontinence in the elderly: prevalence and prognosis. Age Ageing. 14:65-70. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Diokno AC, Brock BM, Brown MB, Herzog AR, 1986. Prevalence of urinary incontinence and other urological symptoms in the non-institutionalized elderly. J Urol. 136:1022-1025. [Medline]
  4. Wetle T, Scherr P, Branch LG, Resnick NM, Harris T, Evans D, Taylor JO, 1995. Difficulty with holding urine among older persons in a geographically defined community: prevalence and correlates. J Am Geriatr Soc. 43:349-355. [Medline]
  5. Chan CJ, Lee KS, Merriman A, Tan EC, Osborn V, 1991. Urinary incontinence among the elderly people of Singapore. Age Ageing. 20:262-266. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Brocklehurst JC, 1993. Urinary incontinence in the community-analysis of a MORI poll. Br Med J. 306:832-834.
  7. Hampel C, Wienhold D, Benken N, Eggersmann C, Thüroff JW, 1997. Definition of overactive bladder and epidemiology of urinary incontinence. Urology. 50: (Suppl 6A) 4-14. [Medline]
  8. Mohide EA, 1986. The prevalence and scope of urinary incontinence. Clin Geriatr Med. 2:639-654.
  9. Herzog AR, Brock BM, Fultz NH, Brown MB, Diokno AC, 1988. Urinary incontinence and psychosocial distress among older adults. Psychol Aging. 3:115-121. [Medline]
  10. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference. Urinary incontinence in adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1990;38:265–272.
  11. Damián J, Martín-Moreno JM, Lobo F, et al. 1998. Prevalence of urinary incontinence among older Spanish people living at home. Eur Urol. 34:333-338. [Medline]
  12. Sandvik H, Hunskaar S, Seim A, Hermstad R, Vanvik A, Bratt H, 1993. Validation of a severity index in female urinary incontinence and its implementation in an epidemiological survey. J Epidemiol Community Health. 47:497-499. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Lagro-Janssen AL, Smits A, Van-Weel C, 1992. Urinary incontinence in women and the effects on their lives. Scand J Prim Health Care. 10:211-216. [Medline]
  14. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B, 1989. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 42: (8) 703-709. [Medline]
  15. Thom D, 1998. Variation in estimates of urinary incontinence prevalence in the community: Effects of differences in definition, population characteristics, and study type. J Am Geriatr Soc. 46:473-480. [Medline]
  16. Herzog AR, Diokno AC, Brown MB, Normolle DP, Brock BM, 1990. Two-year incidence, remission, and change patterns of urinary incontinence in non-institutionalized older adults. J Gerontol Med Sci. 45:M67-M74.
  17. Nygaard IE, Lemke JH, 1996. Urinary incontinence in rural older women: prevalence, incidence and remission. J Am Geriatr Soc. 44:1049-1054. [Medline]
  18. Herzog AR, Fultz NH, 1990. Prevalence and incidence of urinary incontinence in community-dwelling populations. J Am Geriatr Soc. 38:273-281. [Medline]
  19. Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL, Anderson JT, 1991. Standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function. Urodinamica 1:57-75.
  20. Mitteness LS, 1990. Knowledge and beliefs about urinary incontinence in adulthood and old age. J Am Geriatr Soc. 38:374-378. [Medline]
  21. Wyman JF, Harkins SW, Choi SC, Taylor JR, Fantl JA, 1987. Psychosocial impact of urinary incontinence in women. Obstetr Gynecol. 70:378-381. [Medline]
  22. Hunskaar S, Sandvik H, 1993. One hundred and fifty men with urinary incontinence. III. Psychosocial consequences. Scand J Prim Health Care. 11:193-196. [Medline]
  23. Ouslander JG, Abelson S, 1990. Perceptions of urinary incontinence among elderly outpatients. Gerontologist. 30:369-372. [Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
T. A. Shamliyan, R. L. Kane, J. Wyman, and T. J. Wilt
Systematic Review: Randomized, Controlled Trials of Nonsurgical Treatments for Urinary Incontinence in Women
Ann Intern Med, March 18, 2008; 148(6): 459 - 473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical SciencesHome page
J. E. Morley
Editorial: Drugs, Aging, and the Future
J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., January 1, 2002; 57(1): M2 - 6.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical SciencesHome page
S. Maggi, N. Minicuci, J. Langlois, M. Pavan, G. Enzi, and G. Crepaldi
Prevalence Rate of Urinary Incontinence in Community-Dwelling Elderly Individuals: The Veneto Study
J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., January 1, 2001; 56(1): 14M - 18.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation


HOME ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS