Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Efficacy impacts of the different treatment frequencies on female stress urinary incontinence.



Key Questions Addressed
1 KQ 1: What are the benefits and harms of nonpharmacological treatments of UI in women, and how do they compare with each other? KQ 2: What are the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments of UI in women, and how do they compare with each other? KQ 3: What are the comparative benefits and harms of nonpharmacological versus pharmacological treatments of UI in women? KQ 4: What are the benefits and harms of combined nonpharmacological and pharmacological treatment of UI in women?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Efficacy impacts of the different treatment frequencies on female stress urinary incontinence.
Author Zhao L., Wang SY.
Country -- Not Found --
Year 2013
Numbers Pubmed ID: 24617234

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: All studies
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Electroacupuncture 3 times per week
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Electroacupuncture twice per week
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country/countries China
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Explicitly not industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria female, stress urinary incontinence
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria na
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
UI type
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
bladder stress test +, Urethral lift test positive, no detrusor contraction, bladder capacity/sensation is normal, residue<50ml, SUI diagnostic score greater than 12 points
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Directionality Prospective
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age 57
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mean
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
12
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
combined SD
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Men included 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Special populations 60
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
60
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Did participants fail previous treatment? Not reported/unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study years 2009-2010
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Trial name (if given) na
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does this paper cite a previous paper from the same study? no
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Electroacupuncture 3 times per week Electroacupuncture twice per week Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant flow 30 30 60
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
30 30 60
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0 0 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes No data entered.



Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: Cure etc.      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Electroacupuncture 3 times per week Electroacupuncture twice per week


nd years

N Analyzed 30 30
Counts 19 11
Outcome: Cure etc.      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Electroacupuncture 3 times per week Electroacupuncture twice per week


nd years

N Analyzed 30 30
Counts 8 12
Outcome: Cure etc.      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Electroacupuncture 3 times per week Electroacupuncture twice per week


nd years

N Analyzed 30 30
Counts 3 7


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
RCT:.....Adequate generation of a randomized sequence Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Allocation concealment Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Blinding of PATIENTS High RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT.....Intention-to-treat-analysis Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Blinding of OUTCOME ASSESSORS (or "DOUBLE BLIND") Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Incomplete results data (attrition bias) Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL....Group similarity at baseline (selection bias) Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Compliance with interventions Unclear RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
NRCS.....Patients in different intervention groups selected in an equivalent manner
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
NRCS....Baseline differences between groups accounted for (Adjusted analysis)?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Other issues
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL....Were interventions adequately described? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.