Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Long-term effects of pelvic floor muscle training with vaginal cone in post-menopausal women with urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.



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 Long-term effects of pelvic floor muscle training with vaginal cone in post-menopausal women with urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.
Author Pereira VS., de Melo MV., Correia GN., Driusso P.
Country Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brazil. vanft05@yahoo.com.br
Year 2013
Numbers Pubmed ID: 22674639

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


Extraction Form: All studies
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Vaginal cones
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Pelvic floor muscle training
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 Placebo
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country/countries Brazil
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Explicitly not industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria post-menopausal women (defined as absence of vaginal bleeding for 12 months), with at least one episode of SUI symptom during the previous month, reported loss of urine with physical activities such as coughing, sneezing, running
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria Women with urge incontinence symptoms, pelvic organ prolapse greater than grade II on Baden–Walker classification system, previous treatment for UI or hormone therapy, ongoing urinary tract infections, cognitive or neurological disorder, inability to perform the proposed procedure, uncontrolled hypertension
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
UI type
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • 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
    ) |
Age 63
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mean
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
51-85
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Men included 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Special populations 41
  • 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 41
  • 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
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Did participants fail previous treatment? No (explicitly treatment naive)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study years 2009-2011
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Trial name (if given) ND
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does this paper cite a previous paper from the same study? NO
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Vaginal cones Pelvic floor muscle training Placebo Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant flow 15 15 15 45
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
15 13 13 41
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0 2 2 4
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
lost to follow up lost to follow up
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes No data entered.



Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: Satisfaction with intervention      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Vaginal cones Pelvic floor muscle training Placebo


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed
Mean
SD
SE


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
RCT:.....Adequate generation of a randomized sequence Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Allocation concealment Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Blinding of PATIENTS Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT.....Intention-to-treat-analysis Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Blinding of OUTCOME ASSESSORS (or "DOUBLE BLIND") High RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Incomplete results data (attrition bias) Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL....Group similarity at baseline (selection bias) Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Compliance with interventions Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
NRCS.....Patients in different intervention groups selected in an equivalent manner Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
NRCS....Baseline differences between groups accounted for (Adjusted analysis)? Not Applicable
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Other issues Not Applicable
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL....Were interventions adequately described? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.