SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.24 número2Acurácia do Linfonodo Sentinela em Pacientes com Câncer Inicial da Mama Tratadas com Quimioterapia NeoadjuvanteCorrelação entre os Aspectos Laparoscópicos e os Achados Histológicos das Lesões Endometrióticas Peritoneais índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

versão impressa ISSN 0100-7203
versão On-line ISSN 1806-9339


FELDNER JR, Paulo Cezar et al. Role of Clinical History and Physical Examination in the Diagnosis of Urinary Incontinence. Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet. [online]. 2002, vol.24, n.2, pp.87-91. ISSN 0100-7203.

Purpose: to analyze the prevalence of urogynecological symptoms and their relationship with final urodynamic diagnosis, and to compare the clinical sign of stress urinary incontinence with urodynamic diagnosis. Methods: a total of 114 patients were included in a retrospective study from June 2000 to January 2001. All patients were evaluated through medical interview, physical examination and urodynamic study. They were classified according to clinical symptom, presence of clinical sign of urine loss and urodynamic study. The data analysis was performed using a test to determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: the mean age was 51 years (19-80), 61 patients (53.5%) were in menacme and 53 (46.5%) in postmenopausal stage. Ten (18.8%) were using hormone replacement therapy and 25 (21.9%) had been submitted to surgery for incontinence. The isolated clinical symptom of urine loss was reported in 41 (36.0%) patients, the isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence in 13 (11.4%) and mixed symptoms in 60 (52.6%). In the urodynamic study, of all patients with symptom of isolated urine loss, 34 (83%) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI), no patient had detrusor instability (DI), 2 (4.9%) had mixed incontinence (MI) and 5 (12.1%) had a normal result. Of all patients with isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence, in the urodynamic study, none had SUI, 5 (38.5%) had ID, 1 (7.7%) had MI and 7 (53.8%) had a normal result. Of the patients with mixed symptoms, we identified, on the urodynamic evaluation, 25 (41.6%) who had SUI, 10 (16.7%) ID, 10 (16.7%) MI and 15 (25.0%) a normal result. The clinical sign of urine loss was identified in 50 (43.9%) patients. A total of 35 (70%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 6 (12%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 9 (18%) did not have SUI. Urine loss was absent in 64 (56.1%) women. Of those 23 (35.9%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 7 (11%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 34 (53.1%) did not have SUI. Conclusions: clinical history and physical examination are important in the management of urinary incontinence, although they should not be used as the only diagnostic method. Objective tests are available and should be used together with clinical data.

Palavras-chave : Urinary incontinence; Clinical examination; Urodynamic study.

        · resumo em Português     · texto em Português     · Português ( pdf epdf )


Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons