Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 32, Issue 8, pp 523–532 | Cite as

Quality of Life in Patients with Overactive Bladder

Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form
  • Salvador Arlandis-Guzmán
  • Miguel A. Ruiz
  • Carlos Errando
  • Felipe Villacampa
  • Daniel Arumí
  • Isabel Lizarraga
  • Javier Rejas
Original Research Article


Background: Overactive bladder (OAB) is characterized by the symptoms of urinary urgency or urge incontinence, which appear without a local patho logical or metabolic explanation. OAB is defined by symptoms and the evaluation of treatment effectiveness should be based upon patient perceptions. The Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form (OAB-q SF) is a brief, self-administered patient-reported outcomes tool with two scales assessing symptom bother and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in patients with OAB.

Objective: This study aimed to adapt the OAB-q SF into Spanish and to estimate its psychometric properties in patients with symptomatic overactive bladder.

Methods: The Spanish version of the OAB-q SF was administered on two occasions, 3 months apart, to a set of patients of both sexes, over 18 years of age, diagnosed with OAB, scoring ≥8 on the OAB-V8 scale (a self-reported 8-item OAB screening and awareness tool), and able to understand patient-reported-outcome instruments written in Spanish. Patients were recruited consecutively at urology clinics. Feasibility, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), test-retest reliability, structure of instrument, criteria and construct validity and responsiveness were examined using classic test theory statistics.

Results: Data from 246 OAB patients (mean age 57.7 years, 76% women, 99% Caucasian, 37% workers and 36% with a primary education) were evaluated. Floor and ceiling effects ranged between 0.8% and 33%, and missing items were below 2%. Cronbach’ alphas attained 0.811 and 0.922 for symptom-botherz and HR-QOL domains, respectively. These two subscales matched the original structure and explained variances above 50%, which correlated moderately with EQ-5D (EuroQol) [r=−0.28 and r=+0.31, respectively (p< 0.001 in both cases)]. A significant change in OAB−q SF mean domain scores (−23.8; 95% CI −26.3, −21.3; and +17.7; 95% CI 15.4, 20.6; p<0.001 in both cases; [effect sizes: 1.32 and 0.98]) was observed after 3 months of medical treatment.

Conclusion: The Spanish version of the OAB-q SF demonstrated sufficiently strong psychometric properties of reliability, validity and responsiveness to be used in the measurement of O AB symptom severity and HR-QOL.


Overactive Bladder Minimal Important Difference Symptomatic Overactive Bladder Awareness Tool Minimal Important Difference Estimate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



(i) This study was funded by Pfizer, S.L.U. SA, CE, FV, DA and IL participated in the design of the study and interpretation of results and were responsible for drafting the manuscript and searching the bibliography. MR was responsible for the analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and searching the bibliography. JR participated in the logistics of the study, interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and searching the bibliography. SA, CE and FV also participated in recruitment of patients. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

(ii) DA, IL and JR are full-time employees of Pfizer, the company that sponsored the study. MR received a grant from Pfizer, S.L.U. for analysis of the data. Editorial support was not employed. All other authors declare that they do not have competing interests.

(iii) The authors would like to thank all participating patients, colleagues and the staff of the institutions for their contributions to the data collection. Special thanks to Mercedes García-Vargas for the idea of the study and her invaluable contribution in the initial steps of the study and to Ana Cañadas for administrative support.


  1. 1.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardization sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21: 167–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stewart WF, van Rooyen JB, Cundiff JW, et al. Prevalence and burden of overactive bladder in the US. World J Urol 2003; 20: 327–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stewart W, Herzog R, Wein A, et al. Prevalence and impact of overactive bladder in the US: results from the NOBLE program. Neurourol Urodyn 2001; 20: 406–8Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martínez Agulló E, Ruiz Cerdá JL, Gómez Pérez L, et al. Grupo de Estudio Cooperativo EPICC. Prevalence of urinary incontinence and hyperactive bladder in the Spanish population: results of the EPICC study. Actas Urol Esp 2009; 33: 159–66Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ricci JA, Baggish JS, Hunt TL, et al. Coping strategies and health care-seeking behavior in a US national sample of adults with symptoms suggestive of overactive bladder. Clin Ther 2001; 23: 1245–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berges R, Pientka L, Hofner K, et al. Male lower urinary tract symptoms and related health care seeking in Germany. Eur Urol 2001; 39: 682–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Kopp CS, et al. The impact of overactive bladder on mental health, work productivity and health-related quality of life in the UK and Sweden: results from EpiLUTS. BJU Int 2011; 108: 1459–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coyne KS, Tubaro A, Brubaker L, et al. Development and validation of patient-reported outcomes measures for overactive bladder: a review of concepts. Urology, 2006; 68 (2 Suppl.): 9–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Acquadro C, Kopp Z, Coyne KS, et al. Translating overactive bladder questionnaires into 14 languages. Urology 2006; 67: 536–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. A model of equivalence in the cultural adaptation of HRQoL instruments: the universalist approach. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 323–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1417–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bullinger M, Alonso J, Apolone G, et al. Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA approach. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 913–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hays RD, Anderson R, Revicki D. Psychometric considerations in evaluating health related quality of life measures. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 441–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hunt SM, Alonso J, Bucquet N, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation of health measures. Health Policy 1991; 19 (1): 34–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nunnally JC, Berstein IH. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bonomi AE, Cella DF, Hahn EA, et al. Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 309–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cattel RB. Factor analysis: an introduction and manual for the psychologist and social scientist. New York: Harper and Row, 1952Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Everitt BS. Multivariate analysis: the need for data, and other problems. BJ Psych 1975; 126: 237–40Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, et al. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1999; 4: 84–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coyne KS, Lai JS, Zycyzynski T, et al. An overactive bladder symptom and quality-of-life short form development of the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OAB-q SF), 2004). Presented at the 34th Joint Meeting of the International Continence Society and the International Urogynecological Association; August 23–27; Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Coyne KS, Revicki D, Hunt T, et al. Psychometric validation of an overactive bladder symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire: the OAB-q. Qual Life Res 2002; 11: 563–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Irwin DE, et al. The impact of overactive bladder, incontinence and other lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life, work productivity, sexuality and emotional well-being in men and women: results from the EPIC study. BJU International 2008; 101: 1388–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, et al. Estimating a preference-based single index from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. Value in Health 2009; 12: 159–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Coyne KS, Zyczynski T, Margolis MK, et al. Validation of an overactive bladder awareness tool for use in primary care settings. Adv Ther 2005; 22: 381–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Krabbe P, Weijnen T. Guidelines for analysing and reporting EQ-5D outcomes. In: Brook R, Rabin R, de Charro F, editors. The measurement and valuation of health status using EQ-5D: a European perspectivepp. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003: 7–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16 (3): 199–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N. EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide. Dordrecht: Springer, 2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Anderson TW, Rubin H. Statistical inference in factor analysis. In: Neyman J, editor. Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1956: 111–50Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wiley DE. The identification problem for structural equation models with unmeasured variables. In: Goldberger AS, Duncan OD, editors. Structural equation models in the social sciences. New York: Seminar, 1973: 69–83Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Coyne KS, Margolis MK, Thompson C, et al. Psychometric Equivalence of the OAB-q in Danish, German, Polish, Swedish, and Turkish. Value in Health 2008; 11: 1096–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nitti V, Dmochowski R, Sand P, et al. Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of fesoterodine in subjects with overactive bladder. J Urol 2007; 178: 2488–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Coyne KS, Matza LS, Thompson C, et al. The responsiveness of the OAB-q among OAB patient subgroups. Neurourol Urodyn 2007; 26: 196–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coyne KS, Matza LS, Kopp Z, et al. Determining the importance of change in the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. J Urol 2006; 176: 627–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salvador Arlandis-Guzmán
    • 1
  • Miguel A. Ruiz
    • 2
  • Carlos Errando
    • 3
  • Felipe Villacampa
    • 4
  • Daniel Arumí
    • 5
  • Isabel Lizarraga
    • 6
  • Javier Rejas
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of UrologyHospital Universitari I Politecnic La FeValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Methodology, School of PsychologyUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain
  3. 3.Department of UrologyFundación PuigvertBarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Department of UrologyHospital 12 de OctubreMadridSpain
  5. 5.Pfizer Inc.MadridSpain
  6. 6.Medical UnitPfizer, S.L.U., AlcobendasMadridSpain
  7. 7.Health Economics and Outcomes Research DepartmentPfizer, S.L.U., AlcobendasMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations