Vasilchenko V. S., Somilo O. V.

PROGNOSTIC MODELING OF FUNCTIONAL STATUS IN PATIENTS WITH NEUROGENIC BLADDER BASED ON CLINICAL AND URODYNAMIC PREDICTORS

---

Show/Download

About the author:

Vasilchenko V. S., Somilo O. V.

Heading:

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE

Type of article:

Scientific article

Annotation:

Neurogenic bladder is associated with complex lower urinary tract dysfunction that may lead to substantial limitations in daily activities and impaired quality of life. The combination of clinical, functional, and urodynamic factors contributes to considerable interindividual variability in disease outcomes, highlighting the need for personalized prediction of rehabilitation outcomes. The aim of the study was to develop prognostic models of functional limitations and quality of life in patients with neurogenic bladder at 3 months. The study included 40 patients with neurogenic urinary tract dysfunction. Demographic, clinical, and urodynamic characteristics were assessed, together with lower urinary tract dysfunction symptoms using the standardized ICIQ-OAB questionnaire and functional status and quality of life using the WHODAS 2.0 and WHOQOL-BREF questionnaires, respectively. Prognostic models were developed using multiple linear regression analysis to predict the overall level of disability according to WHODAS 2.0 and four domains of quality of life according to WHOQOL-BREF at 3 months. A unified set of eight predictors was used for model development: age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, ICIQ-OAB score, presence of urinary tract calculi, urinary tract infection, and detrusor contractility index (BCI). The WHODAS 2.0 model was statistically significant (R=0.806; R²=0.649; adjusted R²=0.559; F(8,31)=7.17; p<0.001), with ICIQ-OAB score and urinary tract infection demonstrating the greatest independent contributions. The models for the four WHOQOL-BREF domains were also statistically significant and explained 60.0–64.5% of the variance in the respective outcomes, with adjusted R² ranging from 49.6% to 55.3%. The ICIQ-OAB score was the most consistent independent predictor across all models; urinary tract infection also made a statistically significant contribution to the prediction of WHODAS 2.0 and all four WHOQOL-BREF domains. For the Environmental domain, the presence of urinary tract calculi was an additional statistically significant predictor. The developed equations enable quantitative prediction of functional limitations and individual components of quality of life at 3 months based on individual patient characteristics. The findings provide a basis for personalized rehabilitation planning in patients with neurogenic bladder and require further prospective validation

Tags:

Bibliography:

1. Sartori AM, Kessler TM, Castro-Díaz DM, de Keijzer P, Del Popolo G, Ecclestone H, et al. Summary of the 2024 Update of the European Association of Urology Guidelines on Neurourology. Eur Urol. 2024;85(6):543-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.026
2. Ginsberg DA, Boone TB, Cameron AP, Gousse A, Kaufman MR, Keays E, et al. The AUA/SUFU Guideline on Adult Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction: Diagnosis and Evaluation. J Urol. 2021;206(5):1097-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002235
3. Panicker JN, Sakakibara R. Lower Urinary Tract and Bowel Dysfunction in Neurologic Disease. Continuum (Minneap Minn). 2020;26(1):178- 99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/CON.0000000000000824
4. Moussa M, Papatsoris A, Chakra MA, Fares Y, Dellis A. Lower urinary tract dysfunction in common neurological diseases. Turk J Urol. 2020;46(Suppl 1):S70-S78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2020.20092
5. Al Dandan HB, Coote S, McClurg D. Prevalence of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J MS Care. 2020;22(2):91-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7224/1537-2073.2019-030
6. Bientinesi R, Gavi F, Coluzzi S, Nociti V, Marturano M, Sacco E. Neurologic Urinary Incontinence, Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Sexual Dysfunctions in Multiple Sclerosis: Expert Opinions Based on the Review of Current Evidences. J Clin Med. 2022;11(21):6572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11216572
7. Stritt K, Lucca I, Roth B, Grilo N. Is EDSS Enough to Predict Risk of Upper Urinary Tract Damage in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis? Biomedicines. 2022;10(12):3001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10123001
8. Leslie SW, Aeddula NR. Vesicoureteral Reflux. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024.
9. Zhong P, Liu X, Xiang T, Wu J, Liao L. Risk Assessment for Upper Urinary Tract Deterioration in Patients with Neurogenic Bladder: A Retrospective Study Using Interpretable Machine Learning Algorithms. Int Neurourol J. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2652084.042
10. Salinas-Casado J, Vírseda-Chamorro M, Méndez-Rubio S, López-Pérez E, Esteban-Fuertes M, Moreno-Sierra J, et al. Factores de riesgo clínicos y urodinámicos de infecciones urinarias recurrentes en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple. Arch Esp Urol. 2019;72(10):1010-7.
11. Nekhanevych OB, Vasilchenko VS. Quality of life problems associated with bladder function disorders in patients with spinal cord injury. Bull Probl Biol Med. 2025;4(179):166-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29254/2077-4214-2025-4-179-166-177
12. Crescenze IM, Myers JB, Lenherr SM, Elliott SP, Welk B, Qin Y, et al. Predictors of low urinary quality of life in spinal cord injury patients on clean intermittent catheterization. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019;38(5):1332-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23983
13. Moghalu O, Stoffel JT, Elliott S, Welk B, Lenherr S, Herrick J, et al. Psychosocial aspects of health-related quality of life and the association with patient-reported bladder symptoms and satisfaction after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2021;59:987-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-020-00609-x
14. Perrin A, Corcos J. The Utility of Urodynamic Studies in Neuro-Urological Patients. Biomedicines. 2023;11(4):1134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11041134
15. Panicker JN. Neurogenic Bladder: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management. Semin Neurol. 2020;40(5):569-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1713876
16. World Health Organization. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of a WHO Expert Committee. Technical Report Series No 854. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1995.
17. The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires. ICIQ-UI SF Ukrainian version. Available from: https://iciq.net/
18. The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires. ICIQ-OAB Ukrainian version. Available from: https://iciq.net/
19. Rosier PFWM, Schaefer W, Lose G, Goldman HB, Guralnick M, Eustice S, et al. International Continence Society Good Urodynamic Practices and Terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure-flow study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(5):1243-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23124
20. Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J, editors. Measuring Health and Disability: Manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. 88 p.
21. Tymruk-Skoropad K, Muzyka O, Pavlova I. Measuring health and disability of Ukrainian cadets – translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the WHODAS 2.0. Physiother Q. 2023;31(4):49-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/pq.2023.116343
22. Pavlova I, Muzyka O, Tymruk-Skoropad K. World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0: psychometric properties and validation of the Ukrainian version in a sample of cadets of the armed forces. Adv Rehabil. 2022;36(2):39-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/areh.2022.116702
23. World Health Organization. WHOQOL-BREF: Ukrainian version. Geneva: WHO; 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/tools/whoqol/ whoqol-bref/docs/default-source/publishing-policies/whoqol-bref/ukrainian-whoqol-bref
24. Voloshchenko Yu. Yakist zhyttia molodykh liudei: perevirka adaptatsii ukrainskoi versii korotkoho opytuvalnyka yakosti zhyttia (WHOQOL-BREF UKR) sered studentiv pershoho kursu Kyivskoho universytetu imeni Borysa Hrinchenka. Sportyvna Nauka Ta Zdorov’ia Liudyny. 2023;2(10). DOI: https://doi.org/10.28925/2664-2069.2023.24 [in Ukrainian].
25. Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KGM. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. BMJ. 2015;350:g7594. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7594
26. Tamhane AC. Multiple linear regression: model diagnostics. In: Tamhane AC, editor. Predictive analytics: parametric models for regression and classification using R. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons; 2020. p. 95-125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119464761.ch4
27. Vittinghoff E, Glidden DV, Shiboski SC, McCulloch CE. Regression Methods in Biostatistics: Linear, Logistic, Survival, and Repeated Measures Models. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2012. 509 p.

Publication of the article:

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine», 2026 Issue 3, 182, 228-235 pages, index UDC 616.62:616.8]-008.22-07-037-036.82

DOI:

10.29254/2077-4214-2026-3-182-228-235