World Journal of Urology

, Volume 37, Issue 9, pp 1917–1925 | Cite as

Lower urinary tract symptoms treatment constraints assessment (LUTS-TCA): a new tool for a global evaluation of neurogenic bladder treatments

  • Nicolas TurmelEmail author
  • Pierre Lévy
  • Claire Hentzen
  • Camille Chesnel
  • Audrey Charlanes
  • Samer Sheikh-Ismael
  • Gérard Amarenco
  • Philippe Manceau
Original Article



To develop a new tool to assess constraints due to urinary treatments in neurological patients.

Materials and methods

A prospective, monocentric study has been conducted from January to May 2017. Out-patients (multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, Parkinson disease) were included in a referral center if they had LUTS treatment for at least 3 months. To validate psychometric properties, we conducted a literature review, qualitative interviews, and discussion with a panel of six experts. Comprehension, acceptation, and pertinence were tested by a pilot study. A validation study, designed to calculate content validity, internal consistency reliability, and test–retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)] has been conducted. The primary outcome was good psychometric properties defined with Cronbach’s α > 0.7 and ICC > 0.7.


Comprehension, acceptation, and pertinence were excellent. Validation study showed a perfect content validity (r2 = 1) and excellent internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’ α = 0.90). Total score was between 0 (best score) to 66 (maximal constraints). Test–retest reliability calculated using ICC was 0.81. Time to fill questionnaire was 4 min 20 s. The final version was composed by 22 items.


LUTS TCA is the first validated tool to assess constraints of urinary treatment and has excellent psychometric properties.


Constraints Neurogenic bladder Questionnaire Urinary treatment evaluation Tool 



Lower urinary tract symptom


Clean intermittent self-catheterization


Overactive bladder


Intraclass correlation coefficient


Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication


Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire


International Prostate Symptoms Score


Patient global impression of improvement


Overactive Bladder Symptom Score



The authors thank SIFUD PP (Société Interdisciplinaire Francophone d’UroDynamique et de Pelvi Périnéologie) and GREEN-Lilial for their financial support.

Author contributions

Dr. Turmel: protocol/project development/data collection or management/data analysis/manuscript writing/editing. Pr. Levy: data analysis/manuscript writing/editing. Dr. Hentzen: protocol/project development/data collection or management. Dr. Chesnel: protocol/project development/data collection or management. Dr. Charlanes: protocol/project development/data collection or management. Dr. Sheikh-ismael: protocol/project development/data collection or management/manuscript writing/editing. Pr. Amarenco: protocol/project development/data collection or management/data analysis/manuscript writing/editing. Dr. Manceau: protocol/project development/manuscript writing/editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U et al (2003) The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the international continence society. Urology 61(1):37–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Irwin DE, Kopp ZS, Agatep B, Milsom I, Abrams P (2011) Worldwide prevalence estimates of lower urinary tract symptoms, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence and bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int 108(7):1132–1138 (Epub 13 Jan 2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reynolds WS, Fowke J, Dmochowski R (2016) The burden of overactive bladder on US Public Health. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 11(1):8–13 (Epub 23 Jan 2016) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Uren AD, Cotterill N, Harding C, Hillary C, Chapple C, Klaver M et al (2017) Qualitative exploration of the patient experience of underactive bladder. Eur Urol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coyne KS, Kvasz M, Ireland AM, Milsom I, Kopp ZS, Chapple CR (2012) Urinary incontinence and its relationship to mental health and health-related quality of life in men and women in Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Eur Urol 61(1):88–95 (Epub 26 July 2011) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ouslander JG (2004) Management of overactive bladder. N Engl J Med 350(8):786–799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Groen J, Pannek J, Castro Diaz D, Del Popolo G, Gross T, Hamid R et al (2016) Summary of European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on neuro-urology. Eur Urol 69(2):324–33. (Epub 22 Aug 2015) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maman K, Aballea S, Nazir J, Desroziers K, Neine ME, Siddiqui E et al (2014) Comparative efficacy and safety of medical treatments for the management of overactive bladder: a systematic literature review and mixed treatment comparison. Eur Urol 65(4):755–65. (Epub 1 Nov 2013, review) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noblett K, Siegel S, Mangel J, Griebling TL, Sutherland SE, Bird ET et al (2016) Results of a prospective, multicenter study evaluating quality of life, safety, and efficacy of sacral neuromodulation at twelve months in subjects with symptoms of overactive bladder. Neurourol Urodyn 35(2):246–51 (Epub 24 Dec 2014) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vouri SM, Kebodeaux CD, Stranges PM, Teshome BF (2017) Adverse events and treatment discontinuations of antimuscarinics for the treatment of overactive bladder in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 69:77–96 (Epub 14 Nov 2016) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cindolo L, Pirozzi L, Fanizza C, Romero M, Tubaro A, Autorino R et al (2015) Drug adherence and clinical outcomes for patients under pharmacological therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia: population-based cohort study. Eur Urol 68(3):418–25. (Epub 20 Nov 2014) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fermanian J (2005) Validation of assessment scales in physical medicine and rehabilitation: how are psychometric properties determined? Ann Readapt Med Phys 48(6):281–287 (Epub 25 Apr 2005) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, Colman SS, Kumar RN, Brod M, al. (2004) Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes 26(2):12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ruiz MA, Pardo A, Rejas J, Soto J, Villasante F, Aranguren JL (2008) Development and validation of the "Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire" (SATMED-Q). Value Health 11(5):913–926 (Epub 20 May 2008) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shikiar R, Rentz AM (2004) Satisfaction with medication: an overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value Health 7(2):204–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buser N, Ivic S, Kessler TM, Kessels AG, Bachmann LM (2012) Efficacy and adverse events of antimuscarinics for treating overactive bladder: network meta-analyses. Eur Urol 62(6):1040–1060 (Epub 7 Sep 2012) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Karsenty G, Denys P, Amarenco G, De Seze M, Gamé X, Haab F et al (2008) Botulinum toxin A (Botox) intradetrusor injections in adults with neurogenic detrusor overactivity/neurogenic overactive bladder: a systematic literature review. Eur Urol 53(2):275–287 (Epub 16 Oct 2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GREEN GRC 01 UPMC Sorbonne UniversiteHôpital Tenon, Service de Neuro-UrologieParisFrance
  2. 2.Departement de Sante Publique Et Unité de Neurophysiologie Clinique Hopital Tenon (APHP)UPMC and Inserm UMR S 1136 (EPAR Team) 4Paris Cedex 20France

Personalised recommendations