The Urgency Perception Score

Validation and Test-Retest

Jerry G. Blaivas, Georgia Panagopoulos, Jeffrey P. Weiss, Chandra Somaroo, David Chaikin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

50 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We validate a grading system for urinary urgency. Materials and Methods: A total of 225 subjects participated in a validation study of a fixed format question that examined the reasons why an individual usually voids. The response comprised 5 graded categories. The written questionnaire was completed by the subject twice in 3 to 14 days, during which there was no change in symptoms. Subjects included asymptomatic normal volunteers and consecutive patients with lower urinary tract symptoms without urinary urgency and those with overactive bladder with or without other lower urinary tract symptoms. Content validity was established by an expert panel. Discriminant validity was assessed by examining the frequency of responses in the various categories across the 3 groups (chi-square test) and by comparing average scores in each of the 3 groups using 1-way ANOVA, followed by LSD post hoc tests. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and κ coefficient. Results: A total of 83 normal subjects, 62 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and 80 patients with overactive bladder were included in the study. Median age was 71 years (range 21 to 97). For test-retest reliability the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.86) and κ coefficient (0.68) indicated a good level of agreement (p <0.001). The overactive bladder group achieved a significantly higher score than the normal and lower urinary tract symptoms groups (mean ± SD 2.5 ± 0.99 vs 1.6 ± 0.93 and 1.8 ± 0.93, respectively, each p <0.001). Conclusions: The urgency perception score appears to be a valid and reliable means of grading urinary urgency. We believe that this method of grading urgency will prove to be more clinically useful than the simple yes/no characterization of urgency as a sudden compelling desire to void and it will be a useful item for questionnaires and diary keeping.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)199-202
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume177
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Overactive Urinary Bladder
Reproducibility of Results
Lysergic Acid Diethylamide
Validation Studies
Chi-Square Distribution
Analysis of Variance
Healthy Volunteers
Surveys and Questionnaires

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Urology

Cite this

Blaivas, J. G., Panagopoulos, G., Weiss, J. P., Somaroo, C., & Chaikin, D. (2007). The Urgency Perception Score: Validation and Test-Retest. Journal of Urology, 177(1), 199-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.091
Blaivas, Jerry G. ; Panagopoulos, Georgia ; Weiss, Jeffrey P. ; Somaroo, Chandra ; Chaikin, David. / The Urgency Perception Score : Validation and Test-Retest. In: Journal of Urology. 2007 ; Vol. 177, No. 1. pp. 199-202.
@article{35187866d17d46d6887f76847e28eb22,
title = "The Urgency Perception Score: Validation and Test-Retest",
abstract = "Purpose: We validate a grading system for urinary urgency. Materials and Methods: A total of 225 subjects participated in a validation study of a fixed format question that examined the reasons why an individual usually voids. The response comprised 5 graded categories. The written questionnaire was completed by the subject twice in 3 to 14 days, during which there was no change in symptoms. Subjects included asymptomatic normal volunteers and consecutive patients with lower urinary tract symptoms without urinary urgency and those with overactive bladder with or without other lower urinary tract symptoms. Content validity was established by an expert panel. Discriminant validity was assessed by examining the frequency of responses in the various categories across the 3 groups (chi-square test) and by comparing average scores in each of the 3 groups using 1-way ANOVA, followed by LSD post hoc tests. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and κ coefficient. Results: A total of 83 normal subjects, 62 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and 80 patients with overactive bladder were included in the study. Median age was 71 years (range 21 to 97). For test-retest reliability the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.86) and κ coefficient (0.68) indicated a good level of agreement (p <0.001). The overactive bladder group achieved a significantly higher score than the normal and lower urinary tract symptoms groups (mean ± SD 2.5 ± 0.99 vs 1.6 ± 0.93 and 1.8 ± 0.93, respectively, each p <0.001). Conclusions: The urgency perception score appears to be a valid and reliable means of grading urinary urgency. We believe that this method of grading urgency will prove to be more clinically useful than the simple yes/no characterization of urgency as a sudden compelling desire to void and it will be a useful item for questionnaires and diary keeping.",
author = "Blaivas, {Jerry G.} and Georgia Panagopoulos and Weiss, {Jeffrey P.} and Chandra Somaroo and David Chaikin",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.091",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "177",
pages = "199--202",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Blaivas, JG, Panagopoulos, G, Weiss, JP, Somaroo, C & Chaikin, D 2007, 'The Urgency Perception Score: Validation and Test-Retest', Journal of Urology, vol. 177, no. 1, pp. 199-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.091

The Urgency Perception Score : Validation and Test-Retest. / Blaivas, Jerry G.; Panagopoulos, Georgia; Weiss, Jeffrey P.; Somaroo, Chandra; Chaikin, David.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 177, No. 1, 01.01.2007, p. 199-202.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Urgency Perception Score

T2 - Validation and Test-Retest

AU - Blaivas, Jerry G.

AU - Panagopoulos, Georgia

AU - Weiss, Jeffrey P.

AU - Somaroo, Chandra

AU - Chaikin, David

PY - 2007/1/1

Y1 - 2007/1/1

N2 - Purpose: We validate a grading system for urinary urgency. Materials and Methods: A total of 225 subjects participated in a validation study of a fixed format question that examined the reasons why an individual usually voids. The response comprised 5 graded categories. The written questionnaire was completed by the subject twice in 3 to 14 days, during which there was no change in symptoms. Subjects included asymptomatic normal volunteers and consecutive patients with lower urinary tract symptoms without urinary urgency and those with overactive bladder with or without other lower urinary tract symptoms. Content validity was established by an expert panel. Discriminant validity was assessed by examining the frequency of responses in the various categories across the 3 groups (chi-square test) and by comparing average scores in each of the 3 groups using 1-way ANOVA, followed by LSD post hoc tests. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and κ coefficient. Results: A total of 83 normal subjects, 62 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and 80 patients with overactive bladder were included in the study. Median age was 71 years (range 21 to 97). For test-retest reliability the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.86) and κ coefficient (0.68) indicated a good level of agreement (p <0.001). The overactive bladder group achieved a significantly higher score than the normal and lower urinary tract symptoms groups (mean ± SD 2.5 ± 0.99 vs 1.6 ± 0.93 and 1.8 ± 0.93, respectively, each p <0.001). Conclusions: The urgency perception score appears to be a valid and reliable means of grading urinary urgency. We believe that this method of grading urgency will prove to be more clinically useful than the simple yes/no characterization of urgency as a sudden compelling desire to void and it will be a useful item for questionnaires and diary keeping.

AB - Purpose: We validate a grading system for urinary urgency. Materials and Methods: A total of 225 subjects participated in a validation study of a fixed format question that examined the reasons why an individual usually voids. The response comprised 5 graded categories. The written questionnaire was completed by the subject twice in 3 to 14 days, during which there was no change in symptoms. Subjects included asymptomatic normal volunteers and consecutive patients with lower urinary tract symptoms without urinary urgency and those with overactive bladder with or without other lower urinary tract symptoms. Content validity was established by an expert panel. Discriminant validity was assessed by examining the frequency of responses in the various categories across the 3 groups (chi-square test) and by comparing average scores in each of the 3 groups using 1-way ANOVA, followed by LSD post hoc tests. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and κ coefficient. Results: A total of 83 normal subjects, 62 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and 80 patients with overactive bladder were included in the study. Median age was 71 years (range 21 to 97). For test-retest reliability the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.86) and κ coefficient (0.68) indicated a good level of agreement (p <0.001). The overactive bladder group achieved a significantly higher score than the normal and lower urinary tract symptoms groups (mean ± SD 2.5 ± 0.99 vs 1.6 ± 0.93 and 1.8 ± 0.93, respectively, each p <0.001). Conclusions: The urgency perception score appears to be a valid and reliable means of grading urinary urgency. We believe that this method of grading urgency will prove to be more clinically useful than the simple yes/no characterization of urgency as a sudden compelling desire to void and it will be a useful item for questionnaires and diary keeping.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845288612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845288612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.091

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.091

M3 - Article

VL - 177

SP - 199

EP - 202

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -