Urinary incontinence in women: assessment with the aid of standardized nursing terminologies NANDA-I and NOC.

The women were recruited non-probabilistically through sequential sampling from a university hospital outpatient clinic, so the findings may not apply to other settings or to women with urinary incontinence elsewhere. The researcher assigned the NANDA-I nursing diagnoses herself during data collection, so diagnostic inference bias is possible. The post-void residual indicator could not be assessed, and physical examination variables such as pelvic organ prolapse or laceration could not be confirmed because the study relied on interviews during the pandemic. Much of the information was based on participants' reports, so it was subjectively assessed. There were few comparable studies using the NOC Urinary Continence outcome, limiting comparison of NANDA-I diagnoses and NOC indicators. Because this was a cross-sectional assessment, it cannot show that any nursing intervention improved urinary continence.

The study was funded by the Maranhão Research and Scientific and Technological Development Foundation (FAPEMA). No author conflicts of interest are reported in the supplied text.

Do not read the NOC indicator scores or the associations with mixed, stress, or urge urinary incontinence as evidence that a nursing assessment or education improves urinary incontinence. This was a cross-sectional study of women's reported urinary function, and it did not test an intervention.