Male Urinary Symptom Impact Questionnaire (MUSIQ)

Original Editor - Kirsten Ryan

Top Contributors - Kirsten Ryan, George Prudden and Kim Jackson  


The Male Urinary Symptom Impact Questionnaire (MUSIQ) was designed to measure the effect of interventions for urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life in men.[1]

Intended Population

Community dwelling, racially diverse men with continence problems.[1]

Method of Use

The MUSIQ contains 32 items that are each coded on a 4-point scale of impact on quality of life:  0 = not at all, 1 = slightly, 2 = moderately, and 3 = greatly.  Total scores range from 0 (no impact) to 96 (maximum impact).[1]

It takes about 20 minutes to complete by either self-administration or interview.[1]




Internal consistency with Cronbach's coefficient was 0.95[1]


Content validity was supported with percentage agreement scores of 100% for clarity and 89% for item fit.[1]

The Pearson's correlation coefficient between the Male Urinary Distress Inventory and the MUSIQ was 0.59 (P < .001).[1]



The MUSIQ addresses the dimensions of mental/psychological health, social health, and global perceptions of function and well-being, focusing on emotional health, social contact, activity, stability of support, and sleep.

Test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change need to be further evaluated.  Concurrent validity scores should also be correlated with another generic health-related quality of life instruement.  Construct validity should also be reexamined with a larger more symptomatically diverse sample.  There was a possibility of floor effect and therefore should be further studied.[1]


Recent Related Research (from Pubmed)

Failed to load RSS feed from There was a problem during the HTTP request: 500 Internal Server Error


References will automatically be added here, see adding references tutorial.

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Robinson J, Shea J. Development and testing of a measure of health-related quality of life for men with urinary incontinence. J Am Geriat Soc 2002;50:935-945.