Skip to main content

Table 8 Sensitivity analysis: adjusted associations between incontinence status and quality of life (QOL)/ productivity measures using negative binomial regression models (n = 324)

From: Impact of urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life, daily activities, and healthcare resource utilization in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity

Quality of life outcomes

Incontinence status

Base-case analysis

Sensitivity analysis

Incontinence (Yes vs. No)

Average number of UI episodes per day

Number of UI episodes (Ordinal)c

EQ-5D utility score a

0.95 (0.15)

0.99 (0.02)

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

0.97 (0.16)

n > 4

0.91 (0.17)

I-QOL score a

0.83 (0.04)***

0.98 (0.01)**

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

0.86 (0.05)**

n > 4

0.78 (0.05)***

OAB-q symptom severity score a

1.38 (0.08)***

1.03 (0.01)***

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

1.30 (0.08)***

n > 4

1.52 (0.10)***

OAB-q HRQL total score a

0.87 (0.05)**

0.98 (0.01)**

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

0.90 (0.05)

n > 4

0.81 (0.05)**

WPAI – percent activity impairment due to problem a

1.21 (0.10)*

1.03 (0.01)**

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

1.12 (0.10)

n > 4

1.34 (0.13)**

WPAI – percent work time miss due to problem‡ a,b

2.77 (3.11)

1.46 (0.48)

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

2.89 (3.29)

n > 4

1.87 (3.86)

WPAI – percent impairment while working due to problem‡ a,b

1.04 (0.26)

1.08 (0.05)

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

0.99 (0.25)

n > 4

1.39 (0.52)

WPAI – percent overall work impairment due to problem‡ a,b

1.03 (0.39)

1.02 (0.07)

0 ≤ n ≤ 4

1.06 (0.40)

n > 4

0.81 (0.45)

  1. †All analyses adjusted for time since diagnosis, age, male sex, race, education, insurance status, country, and whether having the following comorbidities: psychological/psychiatric conditions, hypertension, diabetes, and dementia.
  2. ‡Comorbidities were not included as covariates.
  3. aIncidence rate ratio (standard error).
  4. bPopulation restricted to patients that were on paid employment (n = 68).
  5. cReference group: patients that reported no leakages.
  6. *p < 0.05 **p < 0.01 ***p < 0.001.