4.6 Article

The International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire: www.iciq.net

Journal

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 175, Issue 3, Pages 1063-1066

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00348-4

Keywords

bladder; urinary incontinence; quality of life; questionnaires; quality assurance, health care

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: In 1998 the first ICI was held in Monaco, sponsored by WHO and organized by the International Continence Society and International Consultation on Urological Diseases. The Scientific Committee recognized the need to develop a universally applicable questionnaire for wide application across international populations in clinical practice and research to assess urinary incontinence, facilitating the comparison of findings from different settings and studies, in a manner similar to the International Prostate Symptom Score. Materials and Methods: An Advisory Board was formed to steer the development of the ICIQ and a decision was made to extend the concept further, developing the ICIQ Modular Questionnaire. Results: The first module developed was the ICIQ Short Form Questionnaire for urinary incontinence. ICIQ modules have been developed or adapted for urinary tract symptoms and they are being developed for vaginal and lower bowel symptoms. Additional sexual matters and quality of life modules will become available for each condition area. Modules to assess patient satisfaction are expected to be of particular use for assessing treatment effectiveness. The ICIQ Advisory Board recently proposed the development of the ICIQ website, which is anticipated to be crucial for informing potential users of the phase of development of all ICIQ modules. Conclusion: The ICIQ can offer a full range of urinary tract symptom questionnaires. The website will aim to attract collaborators committed to the concept of this internationally accepted modular questionnaire who are willing to help with its development.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available