INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Few randomized controlled trials have compared electrical stimulation treatment with drug therapy. Our hypothesis was that electrical stimulation treatment in women with urgency/urge incontinence would be more efficient compared to drug treatment. METHODS:Women ≥18 years of age with urgency/urge incontinence were randomized to receive either ten electrical stimulation treatments vaginally and transanally over a period of 5-7 weeks or tolterodine 4 mg orally once daily. RESULTS:Sixty-one women completed the study. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in micturition rate from baseline to 6 months, mean difference, -0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI), -1.61 to 0.82), but a clearly significant difference within each group for electrical stimulation, -2.8 (95% CI, -3.7 to -1.9), and for tolterodine, -3.2 (95% CI, -4.1 to -2.4). CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments reduced the number of micturitions, but electrical stimulation was not found to be superior to tolterodine.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Few randomized controlled trials have compared electrical stimulation treatment with drug therapy. Our hypothesis was that electrical stimulation treatment in women with urgency/urge incontinence would be more efficient compared to drug treatment. METHODS:Women ≥18 years of age with urgency/urge incontinence were randomized to receive either ten electrical stimulation treatments vaginally and transanally over a period of 5-7 weeks or tolterodine 4 mg orally once daily. RESULTS: Sixty-one women completed the study. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in micturition rate from baseline to 6 months, mean difference, -0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI), -1.61 to 0.82), but a clearly significant difference within each group for electrical stimulation, -2.8 (95% CI, -3.7 to -1.9), and for tolterodine, -3.2 (95% CI, -4.1 to -2.4). CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments reduced the number of micturitions, but electrical stimulation was not found to be superior to tolterodine.
Authors: Paul Abrams; Linda Cardozo; Magnus Fall; Derek Griffiths; Peter Rosier; Ulf Ulmsten; Philip van Kerrebroeck; Arne Victor; Alan Wein Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Raquel M Arruda; Rodrigo A Castro; Gabriela C Sousa; Marair G F Sartori; Edmund C Baracat; Manoel J B C Girão Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2008-03-11
Authors: Fiona Stewart; Luis F Gameiro; Regina El Dib; Monica O Gameiro; Anil Kapoor; Joao L Amaro Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-12-09
Authors: Jose Carlos Truzzi; Cristiano Mendes Gomes; Carlos A Bezerra; Ivan Mauricio Plata; Jose Campos; Gustavo Luis Garrido; Fernando G Almeida; Marcio Augusto Averbeck; Alexandre Fornari; Anibal Salazar; Arturo Dell'Oro; Caio Cintra; Carlos Alberto Ricetto Sacomani; Juan Pablo Tapia; Eduardo Brambila; Emilio Miguel Longo; Flavio Trigo Rocha; Francisco Coutinho; Gabriel Favre; Jose Antonio Garcia; Juan Castano; Miguel Reyes; Rodrigo Eugenio Leyton; Ruiter Silva Ferreira; Sergio Duran; Vanda Lopez; Ricardo Reges Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2016 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.541