Current state of bladder diary: a survey and review of the literature.

Introduction And Hypothesis: The objectives of this study are (1) to assess practice patterns among urogynecology/female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) providers regarding the use of bladder diaries (BD) and (2) to review the literature regarding BD.

Methods: For the first objective, a survey was emailed to United States-based urogynecology providers in 2019 querying frequency of use of bladder diaries (F), indications, problems, patient education methods, and perception of utility. Chi-square tests and multiple logistic regression were performed. For the second objective, we reviewed literature published in English by searching the terms "voiding," "bladder," or "incontinence," in combination with "diary," "log," or "questionnaire."

Results: A total of 371 of 851 (43.5%) contacted providers responded. Nearly 80% were attending physicians, 75.5% of whom completed the FPMRS fellowship; 20.8% of all respondents and nearly 25% of fellowship-trained attendings reported F <20% in the last year. FPMRS providers were more likely to report F >80%. A total of 97.5% of respondents cited difficulty in using BD. Most (71.6%) taught patients to use BD themselves or shared responsibility with a nonphysician staff member (53.4%). BD is a validated and valuable instrument; however, there are obstacles to its use. Despite recent innovations including electronic and automated BD, there is a paucity of data regarding the provider-viewed challenges in implementing BD.

Conclusions: The literature supports the use of BD; however, many survey respondents, including fellowship-trained attendings, never or rarely use BD. Most respondents reported difficulty in using BD. More research is needed to improve the ease, accuracy, and widespread adaptation of BD use in clinical practice.