Lars Viktrup1, Kent H Summers, Susan L Dennett. 1. Clinical Research Physician at Eli Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company Faris II, Drop Code 6112, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USA. Viktrup_lars@lilly.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify clinical practice guidelines from prominent US organizations for the initial management of urinary incontinence (UI) in women and compare them with recommendations from the International Consultation on Incontinence (ICI). The challenge of implementing guidelines in the US was also identified. METHODS: The medical literature was reviewed to identify relevant practice guidelines on the initial management of UI in community-dwelling women according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Guidelines were compared with the ICI international gold standard relating to patient identification, initial therapy, and recommendation for specialist referral. Literature on programs to implement guidelines into clinical practice was reviewed. RESULTS: There is general agreement on how females with UI should be initially managed based on guidelines, monographs, and technical bulletins from prominent US organizations. Though these recommendations are more than 5 years old, they are fairly similar to the latest guidelines developed by the ICI in 2001. Minor discrepancies are mainly related to the lack of updating US guidelines based on most recent knowledge. Implementing existing guidelines into clinical practice presents a challenge. CONCLUSION: No evidence-based practice guidelines from prominent US organizations on the initial management of UI in women exist that are less than 5 years old, but the latest versions are in alignment with recent ICI/WHO guidelines. Although optimization of UI management may be the goal of guidances, the debate remains over whether these recommendations are actually effective in modifying practice. Simplifying and updating guidelines regularly may enhance adaptation in the initial management of UI in women.
OBJECTIVE: To identify clinical practice guidelines from prominent US organizations for the initial management of urinary incontinence (UI) in women and compare them with recommendations from the International Consultation on Incontinence (ICI). The challenge of implementing guidelines in the US was also identified. METHODS: The medical literature was reviewed to identify relevant practice guidelines on the initial management of UI in community-dwelling women according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Guidelines were compared with the ICI international gold standard relating to patient identification, initial therapy, and recommendation for specialist referral. Literature on programs to implement guidelines into clinical practice was reviewed. RESULTS: There is general agreement on how females with UI should be initially managed based on guidelines, monographs, and technical bulletins from prominent US organizations. Though these recommendations are more than 5 years old, they are fairly similar to the latest guidelines developed by the ICI in 2001. Minor discrepancies are mainly related to the lack of updating US guidelines based on most recent knowledge. Implementing existing guidelines into clinical practice presents a challenge. CONCLUSION: No evidence-based practice guidelines from prominent US organizations on the initial management of UI in women exist that are less than 5 years old, but the latest versions are in alignment with recent ICI/WHO guidelines. Although optimization of UI management may be the goal of guidances, the debate remains over whether these recommendations are actually effective in modifying practice. Simplifying and updating guidelines regularly may enhance adaptation in the initial management of UI in women.