Dimensions of Sensation Assessed in Urinary Urgency: A Systematic Review

Purpose: Urinary urgency is an adverse sensory experience. Confirmation of the multidimensional nature of other adverse sensory experiences such as pain and dyspnea has improved the understanding of neurophysiological and perceptual mechanisms leading to innovations in assessment and treatment. It has been suggested that the sensation of urgency may include multiple dimensions such as intensity, suddenness and unpleasantness. In this systematic review we determine which dimensions of sensation have been assessed by instruments used to measure urinary urgency. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was undertaken of MEDLINE (R), Embase (R), AMED, CINAHL (R), Ageline, Web of Science, InformIT Health and Scopus (R) databases to identify studies that included assessments of urinary urge or urgency. Articles were included in the analysis if they were primary studies that described the method used to measure urge/urgency in adults and published in English in peer reviewed publications since January 1, 2000. Articles were excluded from study if urgency was measured only in conjunction with other symptoms (eg frequency or incontinence) or if there was no English version of the instrument. Secondary analyses and systematic reviews were retained to hand search references for additional primary studies. Data were extracted for the instruments used to measure urge/urgency. For each instrument the items specific to urinary urgency were reviewed using a prospectively developed categorization process for the sensory dimension and the measurement metric. Items used to assess urinary urgency were collated in a matrix (sensory dimensions vs assessment metric). The most frequently used dimensions, metrics and combinations were descriptively analyzed. Results: After removal of duplicate articles 1,048 full text articles were screened and 411 were excluded, leaving 637 eligible articles from which data were extracted. A total of 216 instruments were identified which were 1 of 6 types, namely 1) wider symptom questionnaires, 2) urgency specific questionnaires, 3) ordinal scales, 4) visual analog scales, 5) event records or 6) body maps. These 216 instruments contained a total of 309 urgency specific items. Of the instruments 51% did not define a dimension of sensation and 26% did not define the metric used. From the remaining instruments 8 dimensions of sensation and 5 types of metrics were identified. From most common to least common, the sensory dimensions assessed were behavioral response, intensity, suddenness, bother, affective response, unpleasantness, quality (descriptors) and problems associated with sensation. Metrics were magnitude, frequency, presence, time frame or location. The most common sensory dimension/metric combinations were frequency of a behavioral response (14% of items) and magnitude of bother caused by the sensation (8% of items). Conclusions: The hypothesis that urinary urgency is multidimensional is supported by the range of dimensions assessed with available instruments. To clarify the nature of urinary urgency compared with the normal desire to void, prospective studies are required to determine whether sensory dimensions are distinct, and which may delineate between normal and pathological sensation.