Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

A group-based yoga therapy intervention for urinary incontinence in women: a pilot randomized 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 A group-based yoga therapy intervention for urinary incontinence in women: a pilot randomized trial.
Author Huang AJ., Jenny HE., Chesney MA., Schembri M., Subak LL.
Country From the *Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; †Icahn School of Medicine at Mt Sinai, New York, NY; Departments of ‡Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, and §Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Year 2014
Numbers Pubmed ID: 24763156

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


Extraction Form: All studies
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Yoga
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Control
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country/countries USA
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Explicitly not industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria Age > 40; experience incontinence for at least 3 months; document at least 7 episodes of incontinence on a screening 7-day voiding diary; half of those episodes being stress-type or urgency-type incontinence
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria Severe mobility limitations that would prevent participation in the yoga program; previous formal yoga instruction within the past year or any prior use of yoga specifically to treat incontinence; pregnancy within the past 6 months; current urinary tract infection or hematuria (assessed by urine dipstick testing) or history of 3 or more urinary tract infections in the past year; major neurologic condition such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, or Parkinson disease; history of congenital defect leading to incontinence, fistula in the bladder or rectum, pelvic cancer or radiation, or interstitial cystitis or chronic pelvic pain; current symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse; body mass index greater than 35 kg/m2; or prior surgery to the urinary tract. Participants also could not have used practitioner-supervised behavioral, pharmacological, or other clinical treatments (eg, pessary) for incontinence within the past 3 months or be planning to initiate new clinical incontinence treatments during the study.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
UI type 63
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
37
  • 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 61.4
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mean
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
8.2
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Men included 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Special populations 19
  • 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 19
  • 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? Not reported/unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study years 2012
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Trial name (if given)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does this paper cite a previous paper from the same study?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Yoga Control Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant flow 10 9 19
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
9 9 18
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
1 0 1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes No data entered.



Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: Satisfaction with intervention      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Yoga Control


6 weeks

N Analyzed 9 9
Counts 9 0


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
RCT:.....Adequate generation of a randomized sequence Low RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Allocation concealment High RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT:.....Blinding of PATIENTS High RoB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT.....Intention-to-treat-analysis High RoB only completers above certain threshold analyzed
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Blinding of OUTCOME ASSESSORS (or "DOUBLE BLIND") Low 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
NRCS....Baseline differences between groups accounted for (Adjusted analysis)?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL.....Other issues No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
ALL....Were interventions adequately described? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.