Skip to main content
Download PDF

Prevalence and severity of urinary incontinence and associated factors in Iranian postmenopausal women: a cross-sectional study

BMC Urology volume 23, Article number: 18 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Urinary incontinence (UI) is one of the most common symptoms during menopause, leading to a decreased quality of life and limited social activities. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and severity of urinary incontinence and associated risk factors in postmenopausal women.

Methods

It was a cross-sectional study using cluster sampling on 433 postmenopausal women in Tabriz-Iran, 2021–2022. Data were collected using questionnaires of socio-demographic characteristics, Questionnaire for Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis (QUID), and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UISF). Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine factors related to urinary incontinence.

Results

The overall prevalence of urinary incontinence was 39.5%; 20.6% stress urinary incontinence (SUI), 10.4% urgency urinary incontinence (UUI), and 8.5% mixed urinary incontinence (MUI). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the prevalence of SUI (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18–0.77) and UUI (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.15–0.94) was significantly lower in women with three childbirths than the ones with fewer childbirths. Also, the odds of UUI increased significantly in women at the 50–55 age range (aOR 3.88; 95% CI 1.16–12.93) than those less than 50 years.

Conclusion

Due to the high prevalence of urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women, caregivers should screen for early diagnosis and appropriate treatment of urinary incontinence to prevent its destructive impact on the quality of life.

Peer Review reports

Background

Menopausal transition is a biological situation associated with reproductive function loss and various health problems [1]. Menopause, the permanent cessation of menstruation, results from the loss of ovarian follicular activity [2]; it occurs between 45 and 55 years of age. Women spend about one-third of their lives in the postmenopausal period [3]. Menopausal symptoms include physical and vasomotor symptoms (hot flushes and night sweats), osteoporosis, urinary tract atrophy and infections, urinary incontinence (UI), increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, decreased libido, and sexual dysfunction [4].

The prevalence of UI during menopause varies from 9 to 69% [5]. The overall rate is 46% in Iranian women, indicating the urgent need to pay attention to this issue [6]. UI is the complaint of any unintentional passing of urine [7]. It can be classified as follows: (A) Stress incontinence; unintentional and sudden loss of urine caused by increased intra-abdominal pressure with activities such as laughing, pushing, sneezing, and coughing, (B) Urgency incontinence; a sudden, intense urge to urinate followed by an involuntary loss of urine, and (C) Mixed incontinence; a combination of stress and urgency incontinence [8]. The frequency and severity of symptoms are related to age, body mass index (BMI), drowsiness, and constipation [9].

Urinary incontinence is not a life-threatening disease; however, it can affect the social, psychological, familial, occupational, physical, and sexual aspects of patients' lives [10]. UI leads to a decrease in the quality of life, creating social isolation and limiting social activities [11]. It is associated with decreased sexual desire and sexual satisfaction, also the feeling of shame and stress [12]. According to recent data, the peak prevalence of UI is at the age of menopause [13]. Estrogen and collagen deficiency result in decreased elasticity of the pelvic floor, atrophic changes, and urinary incontinence [14]. Advanced age, usually coinciding with menopause, also has debilitating effects on the pelvic organs and tissues [15].

Due to the limited research on the Iranian population [16, 17], the increase in mean life expectancy, and the prevalence of urinary incontinence and its impact on various aspects of life, our study aimed to determine the prevalence and severity of urinary incontinence and its related factors in a health centers-based sample of postmenopausal women in Tabriz-Iran. Caregivers better provide appropriate treatments to reduce the prevalence of UI through educating, preventing, and reducing the impact of risk factors.

Methods

Type of study, setting and participants

It was a cross-sectional and health center-based study on a population of 433 postmenopausal women in Tabriz-Iran 2021–2022. The whole people in Iran have access to free healthcare services, answerable to the Ministry of Health and Medical Education. All health protocols were observed during the Coronavirus epidemic.

Inclusion criteria were no menses for one year, the ability to speak and listen, and having a personal health record at the health center of Tabriz. Exclusion criteria were mental and motor disabilities.

The sample size was calculated to be 289 people based on a previous study by Tashakori et al. [18] and the estimation formula of a proportion (P = 25.1%, α = 0.05, d = 0.05). We selected 433 ones, considering the design effect of 1.5 due to cluster sampling.

Sampling

The study began after obtaining the written approval of the Ethics Committee of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (Ethical code: IR.TBZMED.REC.1400.494). The participants were selected from the centers by cluster sampling method. Tabriz city has 84 health centers; using the website: www.random.org, a quarter of the health centers were randomly selected. The list of postmenopausal women was accessed through integrated health system (SIB) files. The number of selected samples from each center was determined proportionally based on the sample size and the number of postmenopausal women covered by each center. They were randomly selected from the prepared list. The researcher contacted them and explained the research aims and objectives. Considering the inclusion/exclusion criteria, women willing to participate in the study attended a meeting at the health center. After comprehensively explaining the project, they were asked to read and sign a consent form. Socio-demographic characteristics, Questionnaire for Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis (QUID), and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ- UISF) were completed via interviews by the researchers (first and second authors). Due to the Coronavirus epidemic and social distancing, the interviews were conducted individually in an air-conditioned room of health centers. We assessed a sample of 433 postmenopausal women (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Sampling frame

Full size image

Data collection tools

Questionnaires of socio-demographic characteristics, QUID, and ICIQ-UISF were used to collect data.

Socio-demographics characteristics questionnaire

The items were age, menopause age, menopause duration, parity, hormone replacement therapy, education, job, home status, sufficiency of income for living costs, and exercise. The face and content validity of the questionnaire were evaluated qualitatively by Tabriz University of Medical Sciences members.

Questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis (QUID)

It is a self-administered, 6-item questionnaire to distinguish between SUI and UUI. The first three items focus on the symptoms of stress incontinence; the other ones focus on urgency incontinence. A score of 4 and above in the first three items indicates stress incontinence and a score of 6 and above in the second three items is the criterion for urgency incontinence; the existence of both cases indicates the mixed type. Based on the 5-point Likert scale, the scores are: never (0), rarely (1), sometimes (2), often (3), most of the time (4), and always (5). This tool has been validated for the Iranian population [19].

International consultation on incontinence questionnaire-urinary incontinence short form (ICIQ-UISF)

This questionnaire contains six items, examining the individual’s condition in the last four weeks. The items are about demographic characteristics (1–2), frequency of UI (3), amount of leakage (4), and the impact on the quality of life (5); items 3–5 represent the actual score. The sixth item is related to the time and type of urine leakage (not considered). The total score ranges from 0 to 21; mild (1–5), moderate (6–12), severe (13–18), and very severe (19–21). A higher score indicates the intensity of UI. The validity and reliability of this tool were confirmed in 2012 by Haj Ebrahimi et al. in Iran [20].

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed using SPSS-24 software. Descriptive statistics, frequency (percentage) and mean (standard deviation) were used to describe socio-demographic characteristics and types of urinary incontinence. The Chi-square test was used to determine the association between UI with socio-demographic characteristics; variables related to the types of urinary incontinence entered the model with p < 0.2. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the predictors of UI. The results were presented as the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). A p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Description of socio-demographic characteristics

The mean (SD) age of participants was 54.5 (2.2). About two-thirds of women (67.7%) had given birth to less than four children and stated a menopause age before 50 years (64.7%). Most of them had less than eight years since their menopause (80.8%) and did not use hormone therapy to reduce menopausal symptoms (98.2%). Majority of them (81.1%) had an education level less than a diploma. Most women were housewives (88.0%), living in their private homes (94.0%). Most of them (92.7%) stated that household income was relatively/completely sufficient for living expenses. Two thirds of women (62.1%) stated that they do not exercise during the day (Table 1).

Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristics among participants (n = 433)
Full size table

Prevalence of urinary incontinence types

The overall prevalence of urinary incontinence was 39.5%; 20.6% stress urinary incontinence, 10.4% urgency urinary incontinence, and 8.5% mixed urinary incontinence. Urinary incontinence was mild in 81.3% of cases, 12.2% moderate, 5.8% severe, and 0.7% very severe (Table 2).

Table 2 Prevalence of types of incontinence and its severity
Full size table

Relationship between socio-demographic characteristics and urinary incontinence types based on bivariate and multivariate analyses

Based on the chi-square test, there was a statistically significant relationship between the variables of parity (P = 0.004), education (P = 0.002), and job (P = 0.021) with stress urinary incontinence. The highest frequency of SUI was in women with a parity of 4 and more (44.9%), secondary/lower education level (85.4%), and housewives (95.5%). There was a statistically significant relationship between parity and urgency urinary incontinence (P = 0.035); the highest frequency of UUI was in women with a parity of 4 and more (48.9%).

There was a statistically significant relationship between the variables of parity (P = 0.013), education (P = 0.001) and income (P = 0.023) with mixed urinary incontinence. The highest frequency of MUI was in women with a parity of 4 and more (54.1%), secondary/lower education level (94.6%), and insufficient income (45.9%) (Table 3).

Table 3 Relationship between socio-demographic characteristics and types of urinary incontinence based on the Chi-squared test
Full size table

Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the prevalence of SUI (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18–0.77) and UUI (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.15–0.94) was significantly lower in women with three childbirths than the ones with two childbirths or lower. Also, the odds of UUI increased significantly in women at the 50–55 age range (aOR 3.88; 95% CI 1.16–12.93) than those less than 50 years (Table 4).

Table 4 Predictors of incontinence types through logistic regression test
Full size table

Discussion

The exact prevalence of urinary incontinence, especially the different types, has not been assessed in Iran. A similar study was conducted in another city (Yazd) in this country [17]; however, it didn’t categorize the types of UI. Our study was the first that assessed the prevalence and severity of UI with its types in the Iranian population. In the present study, the overall prevalence of urinary incontinence was 39.5%; 20.6% SUI, 10.4% UUI, and 8.5% MUI. The odds of UI increased with age and decreased in women with three childbirths than the ones with two childbirths or lower.

About two in five postmenopausal women had urinary incontinence in this study. In a meta-analysis by Batmani et al. (2021), the prevalence of UI in older women was reported as 37.1% in the world, the highest one in Asia (45.1%) [21]. The prevalence estimates for UI ranged from 25.1 to 26.4% in women aged 45–64 in the Netherlands [22], 35% in premenopausal women aged 45–55 in Australia [23], 38% in women aged 60–84 in the US [24], 46% in women with the mean age of 48 in different cities of Iran [6], and 54% in Yazd-Iran [17]. The difference observed in the results may be due to racial and ethnic differences between countries and participants' socio-demographic characteristics. Age and parity are among the main factors after race and ethnicity.

In the present study, the prevalence urinary incontinence was 20.6% for SUI (the most common type), 10.4% for UUI, and 8.5% for MUI. In a study by Doley et al. (2008), among American women who reported incontinence, 49.8% was for SUI, 34.3% for MUI, and 15.9% for UUI [25]. In another study by Minassian et al. (2008), the overall prevalence of UI was 49.2%; 23.7% SUI, 14.5% MUI, and 9.9% UUI. SUI peaked at the fifth decade [26]. In the study of Zhu et al. (2009) in Beijing, the prevalence of UI in postmenopausal women was 30.9%. The estimated prevalence of SUI, UUI, and MUI was 18.9%, 2.6%, and 9.4%, respectively [27]. In a study by Ajith et al. (2019) in India, the prevalence of UI in postmenopausal women was 26.47%; 13.9% SUI, 7.2% MUI, and 5.4% UUI [28]. All these studies are in line with the present one; SUI was the most common type of urinary incontinence. Parity, one of the main factors affecting urinary incontinence, causes SUI more than other types [29]; it can be the reason for the difference in the prevalence of types of urinary incontinence.

In this study, the prevalence of UUI increased significantly with age. In the study by Bardsley et al. (2016), UI was a multifactorial condition associated with age; it was more common in women than men in all age groups [30]. In a study by Hunskaar et al., the prevalence of UI varied between 5 and 69% and increased with aging [31]. Several studies have defined age as one of the main risk factors of UI [32, 33]. The severity of anterior, apical, and posterior vaginal wall prolapse increases with age [34]. Pelvic floor disorders are associated with age-related connective tissue and neuromuscular changes; other factors include obesity, pulmonary diseases, and diabetes which are common in older people [35]. Due to the increased life expectancy after menopause, age is one of the main factors affecting the prevalence of UI and determining the quality of life [36].

In this study, the prevalence of SUI and UUI decreased significantly in women with three childbirths than the ones with two childbirths or lower. In the study of Garcia et al., the frequency of UI in parous women was significantly higher than in nulliparous ones [37]. Zhu et al. stated that vaginal delivery increases the risk of SUI [38]. Also, Senturk et al. (2012) reported vaginal delivery as the main risk factor for UI [39]. In a cross-sectional study, the effect of the number of deliveries varied from 8% in nulliparous to 17% in primiparous ones. Parity was correlated with UI; the first delivery was the most significant [40]. In the recent research by Larsudd et al., the first vaginal delivery contributed the highest increase in the risk of SUI surgery (threefold); the second vaginal delivery contributed the lowest increase in this risk (∼1/10 of the first vaginal delivery) [41]. In another study by Karmarkar et al., the urethral sphincter was smaller and the bladder neck position was lower in parous women than in nulliparous ones. However, these differences were not progressive with increasing parity [42]. Vaginal delivery is associated with the risk of damage to pelvic floor muscles, nerves, and connective tissue [43]. The mentioned studies agree on the effect of first delivery on the prevalence of UI, but whether this prevalence increases with increasing parity is still controversial.

Strengths and limitations

The use of standard and valid questionnaires and cluster sampling are the strengths of this study. The data was collected in a completely accurate process without any missing. One of the limitations was due to the Coronavirus epidemic and social distancing; this problem was solved by conducting individual interviews and providing an air-conditioned room. Considering the nature of cross-sectional studies, the relationships found between urinary incontinence with socio-demographic characteristics do not accurately indicate a causal relationship. Also, the associated risk factors could not be demonstrated in this study due to the inadequate sample size.

Conclusion

According to the results, more than one-third of the postmenopausal women were suffering from urinary incontinence. The odds of urinary incontinence increased with age and decreased in women with three childbirths than the ones with two childbirths or lower. Due to the increased longevity after menopause, appropriate treatments should be considered to improve the quality of life of postmenopausal women. We recommend conducting a longitudinal study with long-term follow-ups and various treatment methods to find the best one.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to limitations of ethical approval involving the patient data and anonymity but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

QUID:

Questionnaire for Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis

ICIQ-UISF:

International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form

UI:

Urinary Incontinence

SUI:

Stress Urinary Incontinence

UUI:

Urgency Urinary Incontinence

MUI:

Mixed Urinary Incontinence

aOR:

Adjusted Odds Ratio

95% CI:

95% Confidence Interval

References

  1. El Khoudary SR, Greendale G, Crawford SL, Avis NE, Brooks MM, Thurston RC, Karvonen-Gutierrez C, Waetjen LE, Matthews K. The menopause transition and women’s health at midlife: a progress report from the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN). Menopause (New York, NY). 2019;26(10):1213.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Noble N. Symptom management in women undergoing the menopause. Nurs Stand. 2018;32(22):53–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Prajapati MM. Awareness regarding menopausal symptoms and effect on daily life of postmenopausal women. J Patan Acad Health Sci. 2020;7(1):130–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ali AM, Ahmed AH, Smail L. Psychological climacteric symptoms and attitudes toward menopause among Emirati women. Int J Environ Res. 2020;17(14):5028.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ayten D, Menopause and Urinary Incontinence. Recent Studies in Health Sciences 2019, 341. Chapter 31.

  6. Rashidi F, Hajian S, Darvish S, Alavi Majd H. Prevalence of urinary incontinence in Iranian women: systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil. 2019;21(12):94–102.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gomes TA. Faber MdA, Botta B, Brito LGO, Juliato CRT: severity of urinary incontinence is associated with prevalence of sexual dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(8):1669–2174.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Todhunter-Brown A, Hazelton C, Campbell P, Elders A, Hagen S, McClurg D. Conservative interventions for treating urinary incontinence in women: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012337.pub2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Qiu Z, Li W, Huang Y, Huang W, Shi X, Wu K. Urinary incontinence and health burden of female patients in China: subtypes, symptom severity and related factors. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2022;22(3):219–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Frigerio M, Barba M, Cola A, Braga A, Celardo A, Munno GM, Schettino MT, Vagnetti P, De Simone F, Di Lucia A. Quality of life, psychological wellbeing, and sexuality in women with urinary incontinence—where are we now: a narrative review. Medicina. 2022;58(4):525.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Porto MG, Marôco J, Mascarenhas T, Queiroz-Garcia I, Leitão M, Pimenta F. Does urinary incontinence predicts sexual functioning, social isolation and productivity in middle-age women? Maturitas. 2021;152:70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Verbeek M, Hayward L. Pelvic floor dysfunction and its effect on quality of sexual life. Sexual Med Rev. 2019;7(4):559–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Russo E, Caretto M, Giannini A, Bitzer J, Cano A, Ceausu I, Chedraui P, Durmusoglu F, Erkkola R, Goulis DG. Management of urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women: an EMAS clinical guide. Maturitas. 2021;143:223–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Berceanu C, Cirstoiu M, Mehedintu C, Bratila P, Berceanu S, Vladareanu S, Bohiltea R, Bratila E: Hormone deficiency and its impact on the lower urinary tract. In: The 13th National Congress of Urogynecology: 2016; 2016: 29.

  15. Nasreen SZA, Management of Menopause: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2021. New Delhi, India. https://www.jaypeebrothers.com.

  16. Daneshpajooh A, Naghibzadeh-Tahami A, Najafipour H, Mirzaei M. Prevalence and risk factors of urinary incontinence among Iranian women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2021;40(2):642–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Karami H, Abedinzadeh M, Khanizadeh M, Ahrari M, Ayatollahi A, Alipor H. Prevalence of urinary incontinence in women referred to urology clinics in Yazd City in 2019–2020. SSU_J. 2022;30(4):4740–50.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tashakori M, Moghimi A, Pilevaryan A, Moghimian M. Study of severity and prevalence of stress incontinent in menopausal working women in Khorasan. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil. 2006;9(2):47–52.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mokhlesi SS, Kariman N, Ebadi A, Khoshnejad F, Dabiri F. Psychometric properties of the questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis of married women of Qom city in 2015. J Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci. 2017;15(10):955–66.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hajebrahimi S, Nourizadeh D, Hamedani R, Pezeshki MZ. Validity and reliability of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form and its correlation with urodynamic findings. Urol J. 2012;9(4):685–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Batmani S, Jalali R, Mohammadi M, Bokaee S. Prevalence and factors related to urinary incontinence in older adults women worldwide: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21(1):1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rekers H, Drogendijk A, Valkenburg H, Riphagen F. The menopause, urinary incontinence and other symptoms of the genito-urinary tract. Maturitas. 1992;15(2):101–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sherburn M, Guthrie JR, Dudley EC, O’Connell HE, Dennerstein L. Is incontinence associated with menopause? Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(4):628–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Anger JT, Saigal CS, Litwin MS. Project UDoA: the prevalence of urinary incontinence among community dwelling adult women: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Urol J. 2006;175(2):601–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dooley Y, Kenton K, Cao G, Luke A, Durazo-Arvizu R, Kramer H, Brubaker L. Urinary incontinence prevalence: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Urol J. 2008;179(2):656–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Minassian VA, Stewart WF, Wood GC. Urinary incontinence in women: variation in prevalence estimates and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(2):324–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhu L, Lang J, Liu C, Xu T, Liu X, Li L, Wong F. Epidemiological study of urge urinary incontinence and risk factors in China. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(5):589–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ajith AK, Rekha A, Duttagupta S, Murali V, Ramakrishnan D, Krishnapillai V. Prevalence and factors of urinary incontinence among postmenopausal women attending the obstetrics and gynecology outpatient service in a tertiary health care center in Kochi, Kerala. Indian J Communy Med. 2019;44(Suppl 1):S30.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Saba N, Rasheed I, Rasheed S, Khan ZA, Fatima A, Nadeem S. Long-term impact of mode of delivery on urinary stress incontinence. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2022;16(03):1058.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bardsley A. An overview of urinary incontinence. Br J Nurs. 2016;25(18):S14-21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rortveit G, Daltveit AK, Hannestad YS, Hunskaar S. Urinary incontinence after vaginal delivery or cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(10):900–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Moon S, Chung HS, Kim YJ, Kim SJ, Kwon O, Lee YG, Yu JM, Cho ST. The impact of urinary incontinence on falls: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(5): e0251711.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Xie X, Chen Y, Khan A, Long T, Li S, Xie M. Risk factors for urinary incontinence in Chinese women: a cross-sectional survey. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2021;27(6):377–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Laganà AS, La Rosa VL, Rapisarda AMC, Vitale SG. Pelvic organ prolapse: the impact on quality of life and psychological well-being. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;39(2):164–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pang H, Zhang L, Han S, Li Z, Gong J, Liu Q, Liu X, Wang J, Xia Z, Lang J. A nationwide population-based survey on the prevalence and risk factors of symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse in adult women in China–a pelvic organ prolapse quantification system-based study. BJOG: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2021;128(8):1313–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Daugirdas SP, Markossian T, Mueller ER, Durazo-Arvizu R, Cao G, Kramer H. Urinary incontinence and chronic conditions in the US population age 50 years and older. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(5):1013–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. García-Pérez H, Harlow SD, Sampselle CM, Denman C. Measuring urinary incontinence in a population of women in northern Mexico: prevalence and severity. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(5):847–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu L, Lang J, Wang H, Han S, Huang J. The prevalence of and potential risk factors for female urinary incontinence in Beijing, China. Menopause. 2008;15(3):566–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Senturk S, Kara M. Risk factors and prevalence of urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women living in Turkey. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39(1):69–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rortveit G, Hannestad YS, Daltveit AK, Hunskaar S. Age-and type-dependent effects of parity on urinary incontinence: the Norwegian EPINCONT study. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(6):1004–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Larsudd-Kåverud J, Gyhagen J, Åkervall S, Molin M, Milsom I, Wagg A, Gyhagen M. The influence of pregnancy, parity, and mode of delivery on urinary incontinence and prolapse surgery—a national register study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;228(1):61.e1-13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Karmarkar R, Digesu A, Fernando R, Khullar V. Ultrasound assessment of urethral structure and bladder neck position in women with different parities. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(3):613–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Özdemır ÖÇ, Bakar Y, Özengın N, Duran B. The effect of parity on pelvic floor muscle strength and quality of life in women with urinary incontinence: a cross sectional study. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27(7):2133–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the women for their participation in this research project.

Funding

Tabriz University of Medical Sciences provided funding but it had no role in the design and conduct of the study, and decision to this manuscript writing and submission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Afsaneh Alizadeh, Maryam Montazeri & Fatemeh Shabani

  2. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Soheila Bani

  3. Women’s Reproductive Health Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Shirin Hassanpour

  4. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran

    Mahsan Nabighadim

  5. Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Mojgan Mirghafourvand

Authors
  1. Afsaneh Alizadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maryam Montazeri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatemeh Shabani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Soheila Bani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shirin Hassanpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mahsan Nabighadim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mojgan Mirghafourvand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All of the authors contributed to the conception, design of the study and revised the manuscript. AA and FS drafted the manuscript under direct supervision of MM (Corresponding author). MM (Corresponding author) conducted statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mojgan Mirghafourvand.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the ethics committee of the research and technology deputy of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (Ethical code: IR.TBZMED.REC.1400.494). The informed written consent was obtained from all participants. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alizadeh, A., Montazeri, M., Shabani, F. et al. Prevalence and severity of urinary incontinence and associated factors in Iranian postmenopausal women: a cross-sectional study. BMC Urol 23, 18 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01186-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01186-w

Keywords

BMC Urology

ISSN: 1471-2490

Contact us