Diagnostic Accuracy of Anthropometric Indicators in the Prediction of Urinary Incontinence in Physically Active Older Women

Abstract

Purpose To determine the diagnostic accuracy and the cutoff point of the variables conicity index, waist to height ratio and fat percentage to detect urinary incontinence in physically active older women. Method A total of 152 women were analyzed. The instruments used were the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ [Area 4]) to check the level of physical activity, and the Diagnostic Form to obtain sociodemographic data and presence of urinary incontinence. To calculate the conicity index, waist to height ratio and fat percentage, body mass, height and waist circumference were measured. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. Cutoff points, sensitivity (S) and specificity (SP) were determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. A 5% significance level was adopted. Results The prevalence of urinary incontinence was of 32.2%. The cutoff point with better sensitivity and specificity for the conicity index was 1.23 (S = 87.8; SP = 35.9); for the waist to height ratio, it was 0.57 (S = 79.6; SP = 45.6); and for the fat percentage, it was 39.71 (S = 89.8; SP = 42.7). The area under the ROC curve was 0.666 for the conicity index, 0.653 for the waist to height ratio, and 0.660 for the fat percentage. Conclusions The cutoff points for the anthropometric measurements conicity index, waist to height ratio and fat percentage indicate that these measures can be used to predict urinary incontinence in physically active older women. Furthermore, fat percentage seemed to be the best measure for this population.

Anthropometric indicators as predictors of pelvic floor muscle distress in young women

“…Besides this, cut-off points of other anthropometric indicators have been observed when detecting SUI. 24 These authors identified that values above 1.23 for the taper index, 0.55 for waist-to-height ratio, and 39.71 for body fat percentage may detect SUI. Another study obtained cut-off points of 25.82 kg/m 2 for BMI, 78.50 cm for WC, 0.84 for WHR to detect UI, but none of these indicators had an area under the ROC curve greater than 0.7 suggesting limitation in only one indicator to predict UI.…”

Female urinary incontinence and obesity assessed by anthropometry and dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry: Analysis from the 2008–09 Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

“…A previous cross‐sectional study demonstrated that overall obesity is a strong risk factor for UI . The largest cross‐sectional population‐based study that enrolled 28 000 women reported that the association between BMI and UI was strong and that there was a dose–response effect of BMI on the prevalence of UI .…”

“…The mechanism by which obesity is related UI is theorized to be an obesity‐induced increase in abdominal pressure that, in turn, increases bladder pressure and urethral mobility, leading to stress UI, as well as exacerbating detrusor instability and overactive bladder . Overall obesity parameters, such as body weight or body mass index (BMI), are related to UI . In addition, central obesity parameters, such as waist circumference or the waist : hip ratio, have been shown to be related to UI .…”

“…Overall obesity parameters, such as body weight or body mass index (BMI), are related to UI . In addition, central obesity parameters, such as waist circumference or the waist : hip ratio, have been shown to be related to UI . However, these anthropometric measures (i.e.…”