Scholarlink

Introduction and Hypothesis <p>Fecal and anal incontinence (FI/AI) significantly impact physical, emotional, and social aspects of quality of life. Accurate assessment tools are essential for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment evaluation.</p> Methods <p>A scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. Searches were performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), and PEDro from database earliest available records to February 2025. Studies on development, validation, or cross-cultural adaptation of FI/AI assessment tools in English or Portuguese were included.</p> Results <p>Fifty-two studies describing 52 assessment instruments were included. The majority of tools were self-administered questionnaires (<i>n</i> = 34, 65.4%) and primarily assessed quality of life. Only a minority reported complete psychometric validation and formal cross-cultural adaptation procedures, and few instruments addressed objective anorectal motor or sensory function.</p> Conclusions <p>Although several instruments are available, important gaps remain, particularly regarding functional evaluation, psychometric completeness, and cross-cultural adaptation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Instruments for the Assessment of Fecal and Anal Incontinence: A Scoping Review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月22日

查看全文
  • Amanda Cruz Amorim,
  • Nicole de Almeida Maciente Martins da Silva,
  • Marair Gracio Ferreira Sartori,
  • Sérgio B. Martins,
  • Leticia M. Oliveira,
  • Marcia M. Dias,
  • Claudia C. Takano,
  • Leticia A. Ferreira,
  • Zsuzsanna K. Di Bella,
  • Dalila Duarte,
  • Sue Y. Sun,
  • Rosiane Mattar,
  • Elesiario C. Marques,
  • Sarhan Saad

摘要

Introduction and Hypothesis

Fecal and anal incontinence (FI/AI) significantly impact physical, emotional, and social aspects of quality of life. Accurate assessment tools are essential for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment evaluation.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. Searches were performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), and PEDro from database earliest available records to February 2025. Studies on development, validation, or cross-cultural adaptation of FI/AI assessment tools in English or Portuguese were included.

Results

Fifty-two studies describing 52 assessment instruments were included. The majority of tools were self-administered questionnaires (n = 34, 65.4%) and primarily assessed quality of life. Only a minority reported complete psychometric validation and formal cross-cultural adaptation procedures, and few instruments addressed objective anorectal motor or sensory function.

Conclusions

Although several instruments are available, important gaps remain, particularly regarding functional evaluation, psychometric completeness, and cross-cultural adaptation.