Evidence Hub

The responsiveness of the OAB-q among OAB patient subgroups

Coyne KS, Matza LS, Thompson C, Jumadilova Z, Bavendam T

Neurourology and urodynamics, 2007

397 participants

Abstract

AIMS: Although the majority of patients with overactive bladder (OAB) are continent, most patient-reported outcome measures for OAB were designed for patients with urinary incontinence. The overactive bladder questionnaire (OAB-q) was developed to assess symptom bother and HRQL among both continent and incontinent OAB patients; however, the responsiveness of the OAB-q among continent patients has not been evaluated. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the responsiveness of the OAB-q among OAB patient subgroups with a focus on continent patients.

METHODS: Post-hoc analyses were conducted from two 12-week trials of tolterodine for the treatment of OAB. Patients completed the OAB-q and daily bladder diaries (assessing frequency, urgency, and incontinence episodes) at baseline, 4 weeks, and 12 weeks. Three patient subgroups were identified on the basis of continence status at all three timepoints: (1) continent; (2) incontinent; and (3) incontinent at baseline and continent by Week 12 (ITC). General linear models were used to compare changes from baseline, and Spearman correlations assessed the association between OAB-q changes and bladder diary changes. Effect sizes were computed separately for each group.

RESULTS: A total of 262 continent, 552 incontinent, and 397 ITC patients were included in this analysis. Continent patients tended to be younger than incontinent patients, and patients were predominantly female, although continent patients had the highest percentage of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 397 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free