Outcomes in Functional Urology: towards a prediction model in pelvic floor disorders

The two fundamental research questions of this thesis are: 1) Can we lay the foundations to construct a complete diagnostic and prognostic prediction model in pelvic floor disorders in the future? 2) Can we construct the first part of this prediction model, a prognostic model that predicts the outcome of urge urinary incontinence treatment

The urinary-specific quality of life of multiple sclerosis patients: Dutch translation and validation of the SF-Qualiveen

Aims: The SF-Qualiveen is a short questionnaire that measures the impact of urinary symptoms on the quality of life of patients with urological dysfunction due to neurological disorders. The aim of this study is to translate, culturally adapt and validate a Dutch version of the SF-Qualiveen for use in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients. Methods: Cross-cultural adaptation of the original English SF-Qualiveen into Dutch was performed according to standardized guidelines. Adult MS patients with symptomatic urinary disorders who visited the Urology or Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of the Erasmus Medical Center completed the SF-Qualiveen and the Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6), that evaluates bother caused by lower urinary tract symptoms and was used as a gold standard, at baseline and 1-2 weeks later. A control group recruited from the Otolaryngology outpatient clinic completed the questionnaires once. Reliability and validity were determined. Results: Fifty MS patients and 50 controls were included. SF-Qualiveen scores in patients were higher than in controls (on a scale of 0-4: 1.73 vs. 0.34; P 0.8) and reproducibility (Intraclass correlation coefficients >0.8) were good for the total SF-Qualiveen. Content validity was adequate and a significant relationship between SF-Qualiveen and UDI-6 (r = 0.510-0.479, P < 0.

The validation of the Dutch SF-Qualiveen, a questionnaire on urinary-specific quality of life, in spinal cord injury patients

Background: Optimizing the patients' quality of life is one of the main goals in the urological management of spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. In this study we validated the Dutch SF-Qualiveen, a short questionnaire that measures the urinary-specific quality of life, in SCI patients. No such measure is yet available for this patient group. Methods: In 2015-2016 SCI patients with urinary symptomatology who visited the outpatient clinics of Urology at the Erasmus Medical Centre and Rehabilitation at Rijndam Revalidation completed the SF-Qualiveen and UDI-6 during the visit and 1-2 weeks later. The UDI-6, a urinary tract symptom inventory, served as gold standard. Controls, recruited from the Otolaryngology outpatient clinic, completed the questionnaires once. Content-, construct-, and criterion validity and reliability (internal consistency and reproducibility) of the SF-Qualiveen were determined. Results: Fifty seven SCI patients and 50 controls were included. 12 SCI patients asserted that the SF-Qualiveen covered their bladder problems (good content validity). Patients' SF-Qualiveen scores being positively associated with severity of urinary symptoms and patients' scores being higher than those of controls indicated good construct validity. The positive association that was found between SF-Qualiveen and UDI-6 in patients (r = 0.66-0.67, P < 0.001) and controls (r = 0.63, P < 0.001) confirmed good criterion validity. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.89-0.92) and reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.94) of the SF-Qualiveen were good. Conclusions: The Dutch SF-Qualiveen is a valid and reliable tool to measure the urinary-specific quality of life in SCI patients

Heterogeneity in reporting on urinary outcome and cure after surgical interventions for stress urinary incontinence in adult neuro-urological patients: A systematic review

Aims: To describe all outcome parameters and definitions of cure used to report on outcome of surgical interventions for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in neuro-urological (NU) patients. Methods: This systematic review was performed and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The study protocol was registered and published (CRD42016033303; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials databases, and clinicaltrial.gov were systematically searched for relevant publications until February 2017. Result