1. Disclosure of Faecal Incontinence in Patients with Urinary Symptoms
18434
Disclosure of Faecal Incontinence in Patients with Urinary Symptoms
Wai-Sze Paulin MA
Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong
HONG KONG
Aim of Study
Results (con’t)
To assess the willingness of disclosure of faecal incontinence in patients who already presented to urogynaecology clinic for urinary symptoms.
Figure 1. Distribution of information on faecal incontinence among 225 patients
Materials and Methods
Retrospective chart review were performed in patients presented to a local urogynaecology clinic for urinary symptoms in the period 2013 to 2014.
Demographic data of patients were collected.
Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) were checked. Those who answered ‘’yes’’ to question 36 to 39 were considered as suffering from faecal incontinence.
Their written response were compared to their response to the physician’s direct enquiry during the consultations.
no information
without faecal incontinence
With faecal incontinence
Written disclosure only
Written & verbal disclosure
Mean score of the PFDI was found to be 5.17+/-2.99 in patients who disclosed the symptoms in both written and verbal form (Group 1) and 5.29+/-3.66 in those who only disclosed the symptoms in written form (Group 2), P>0.05.
Results
Conclusions
225 records were reviewed.
Those who disclosed the symptoms both verbally and from questionnaire were considered as Group 1, while those who only disclosed the symptoms in written form were considered as Group 2. Distribution were shown in Figure 1.
No statistical significant difference was found when comparing the demographic data between 2 groups.
Faecal incontinence is common among patients who were suffering from urinary symptoms.
Patients were more readily in disclosing their symptoms in written form rather than orally irrespective of the severity of symptoms and the bothersome.
Nearly one-fifth of patients did not have this assessed by the attending physicians, signifying low suspicion index of faecal incontinence by clinicians.