Basic mechanisms of urgency: roles and benefits of pharmacotherapy

Introduction Since urgency is key to the overactive bladder syndrome, we have reviewed the mechanisms underlying how bladder filling and urgency are sensed, what causes urgency and how this relates to medical therapy. Materials and methods Review of published literature. Results As urgency can only be assessed in cognitively intact humans, mechanistic studies of urgency often rely on proxy or surrogate parameters, such as detrusor overactivity, but these may not necessarily be reliable. There is an increasing evidence base to suggest that the sensation of ‘urgency’ differs from the normal physiological urge to void upon bladder filling. While the relative roles of alterations in afferent processes, central nervous processing, efferent mechanisms and in intrinsic bladder smooth muscle function remain unclear, and not necessarily mutually exclusive, several lines of evidence support an important role for the latter. Conclusions A better understanding of urgency and its causes may help to develop more effective treatments for voiding dysfunction

Development of a core set of outcome measures for OAB treatment

© 2017, The Author(s). Introduction and hypothesis: Standardized measures enable the comparison of outcomes across providers and treatments giving valuable information for improving care quality and efficacy. The aim of this project was to define a minimum standard set of outcome measures and case-mix factors for evaluating the care of patients with overactive bladder (OAB). Methods: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international working group (WG) of leading clinicians and patients to engage in a structured method for developing a core outcome set. Consensus was determined by a modified Delphi process, and discussions were supported by both literature review and patient input. Results: The standard set measures outcomes of care for adults seeking treatment for OAB, excluding residents of long-term care facilities. The WG focused on treatment outcomes identified as most important key outcome domains to patients: symptom burden and bother, physical functioning, emotional health, impact of symptoms and treatment on quality of life, and success of treatment. Demographic information and case-mix factors that may affect these outcomes were also included. Conclusions: The standardized outcome set for evaluating clinical care is appropriate for use by all health providers caring for patients with OAB, regardless of specialty or geographic location, and provides key data for quality improvement activities and research