The Comprehensive Assessment of Self-Reported Urinary Symptoms: A New Tool for Research on Subtypes of Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Abstract
Purpose:
To improve the potential for finding clinically important subtypes of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms we developed the CASUS (Comprehensive Assessment of Self-reported Urinary Symptoms). We used it to present data on the experiences of lower urinary tract symptoms in treatment seeking women and men from a prospective observational cohort.
Materials and Methods:
We created an initial list of lower urinary tract symptoms that were confirmed in 22 qualitative interviews with providers, and 88 qualitative interviews with care seeking and noncare seeking women and men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Items from extant measures were adopted and revised, and new items were developed. All items were evaluated for understanding in 64 cognitive interviews. Items were administered to a prospective cohort of female and male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms who were seeking care. Analyses were done to describe item response distributions and correlations among item responses separately for women and men.
Results:
A total of 444 males and 372 females provided responses to the CASUS. Several sets of items showed different relationships for women compared to men. In particular the associations between sensation related items and incontinence related items were generally positive among females but often negative among males.
Conclusions:
After using an intensive development process the CASUS addresses a wide range of lower urinary tract symptoms. It should help identify clinically important subtypes of patients. Further, item collection can provide the foundation for shorter measures for use in the clinic and as trial end points.
References
- 1. : Symptoms of lower urinary tract dysfunction research network. J Urol 2016; 196: 146. Link, Google Scholar
- 2. : The American Urological Association Symptom Index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association. J Urol 1992; 148: 1549. Link, Google Scholar
- 3. : Moving towards a comprehensive assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Neurourol Urodyn 2012; 31: 448. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 4. : The international Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire: www.iciq.net. J Urol 2006; 175: 1063. Link, Google Scholar
- 5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research and FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health: Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 79. Google Scholar
- 6. : Reasons for seeking clinical care for lower urinary tract symptoms: a mixed methods study. J Urol 2018; 199: 528. Link, Google Scholar
- 7. : Item bank development, calibration and validation for patient-reported outcomes in female urinary incontinence. Qual Life Res 2016; 25: 1645. Google Scholar
- 8. : Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review. Med Care, suppl., 2007; 45: S12. Google Scholar
- 9. : Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications 2004. Google Scholar
- 10. : WRAT4: Wide Range Achievement Test. Lutz, Florida: PAR 2006. Google Scholar
- 11. : Baseline lower urinary tract symptoms in patients enrolled in the Symptoms of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Research Network (LURN): a prospective, observational cohort study. J Urol 2018; 199: 1023. Link, Google Scholar
- 12. : Variation in genetic architecture of calling song among populations of Allonemobius socius, A. fasciatus, and a hybrid population: drift or selection?Evolution 1999; 53: 216. Google Scholar
- 13. : Prevalence and characteristics of urinary incontinence in a treatment seeking male prospective cohort: results from the LURN study. J Urol 2018; 200: 397. Link, Google Scholar
The corresponding author certifies that, when applicable, a statement(s) has been included in the manuscript documenting institutional review board, ethics committee or ethical review board study approval; principles of Helsinki Declaration were followed in lieu of formal ethics committee approval; institutional animal care and use committee approval; all human subjects provided written informed consent with guarantees of confidentiality; IRB approved protocol number; animal approved project number.
Supported by NIDDK cooperative agreements (Grants DK097780, DK097772, DK097779, DK099932, DK100011, DK100017, DK097776, DK099879), NIDDK Grant K23-DK110417 and in part by NIH (National Institutes of Health) NCATS (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences) Grant UL1TR001422.
This is publication number 15 of the LURN.
The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
No direct or indirect commercial, personal, academic, political, religious or ethical incentive is associated with publishing this article.
