Pad use and patient reported bother from urinary leakage after radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE

To better understand clinically significant definitions of urinary incontinence we investigated the relationship between urinary leakage and patient reported bother from urinary leakage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive series of 1,411 men who underwent radical prostatectomy at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden, from 2002 to 2006 were invited to complete a study specific questionnaire with questions on pad status, urinary leakage and bother from urinary leakage.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were received from 1,179 men with a followup of greater than 1 year (median 2.2). Results showed that even a small amount of urinary leakage resulted in a high risk of urinary bother. Of 775 survivors 46 (6%) reporting 0 pads indicated moderate or much bother compared to 38 of 123 (31%) who reported using a security pad. When comparing the 2 groups, the risk of bother from urinary leakage was more than 5 times higher in the safety pad vs the 0 pad group (RR 5.2, 95% CI 3.5-7.7). As the number of pads increased, we noted a higher bother risk. Cross-tabulation of pad use and urinary leakage revealed wide variation in pad requirements despite the same answer to urinary leakage questions.

CONCLUSIONS

If the definition of continence is based on pad use, for example safety pads, a certain number of men who report moderate or much bother from urinary leakage will be defined as continent. Our results also show that for each stated rate of urinary leakage men prove to have a major variation in the pad requirement.