[Which are reasonable diagnostic procedures in the evaluation of urinary incontinence in the elderly?]

The ageing of our society continuously increases the number of frail elderly patients in the incontinence cohort. Shortage of financial and personnel resources demands reasonable and purposeful use of the diagnostic armamentarium. All intended diagnostic procedures should follow an algorithm hierarchized for invasiveness and should be limited to the minimum extent necessary for initiation of a conservative first-line treatment. Reasonable diagnostics objectify patients' complaints, differentiate between subgroups, reveal underlying pathologies and comorbidities, classify incontinence severity, support the therapeutic strategy, identify possible treatment complications and serve as follow-up tools. Diagnostic results have to be documented in detail and the procedures must be as easy and minimally invasive as possible. Basic diagnostics in urinary incontinence comprise patient history, clinical examination, urinalysis, uroflowmetry and sonographic post-void residual measurement, voiding diary and evaluation of the mental status. With these procedures, the vast majority of elderly patients can be classified correctly and a conservative first-line treatment can be started. Only a minority of patients with incongruent diagnostic results or recurrent incontinence refractory to conservative therapy should undergo further special diagnostics (urethrocystoscopy, urodynamics, morphologic and functional radiologic imaging, perineal or introital ultrasound) if they lead to therapeutic consequences. If not, expensive special diagnostics should be omitted in elderly patients due to their inherent morbidity.