Context: Urinary incontinence and its management represent the most challenging condition in a patient with spinal cord injury. In order to provide a comprehensive and satisfactory treatment it is crucial to integrate patient education and information about urinary incontinence into the therapeutic concept. This study aims to compare therapeutic approaches in Austria and the United States of America regarding the impact of patient educational methods. Study design: Cross-sectional study by means of an empiric questionnaire. Methods: A questionnaire was designed covering the following topics: a) patient education, b) information on bladder management and c) treatment of urinary incontinence. By answering the questionnaire, both, the professionally trained physical therapist as well as the individual suffering of this condition would subjectively evaluate the necessity of integrating the above mentioned features into a treatment protocol for urinary incontinence in patients suffering of spinal cord injuries. The questionnaire was provided to physical therapists and patients of three Austrian rehabilitation centers Tobelbad, Bad Häring and Weißer Hof as well as to two American facilities Life strength physical therapy and John Hopkins Medical Center. Results are displayed in circle diagrams and table form. Results: A total of 20 physcial therapists, 16 Austrian and 4 US-American and 13 patients, 9 Austrian and 4 US-American responded to the questionnaire. Analysis of responses to the questionnaire reveals a significant difference in patient interaction in Austrian versus US-American rehabilitation facilities. Physical therapists in the US may conclude and treat patients based on their own evaluation and consecutive diagnosis, whereas the Austrian system is more interdependent on diagnostic labels and treatment suggestion provided by a medical doctor, mostly urologists. This difference in autonomy for diagnosis of medical conditions makes the physical therapist one of the primary sources for condition related medical information; in the underlying work i.e. urinary incontinence. Additionally to these system inherent differences, certain treatment modalities as for example pelvic floor strengthening and biofeedback are as such not part of the treatment guidelines of the Austrian physical therapy. Conclusion: This investigation was able to outline system inherent differences between the Austrian and the US-American medical system, specifically diagnostic- and treatment autonomy which is given for US licensed physical therapists. The results of this thesis show that Austrian physical therapists are less involved in condition related patient education, specifically as part of this study, urinary incontinence in spinal cord injury patients. Patient responses however, unanimously support that condition related information and access to such information is sufficiently provided by the treating urologist. This is furthermore underlined by the feedback provided by Austrian physical therapists.