Nahid Golmakani1, Nayereh Khadem2, Arezoo Arabipoor3, Behzad Feizzadeh Kerigh4, Habibollah Esmaily5. 1. Master of Science in Midwifery, Lecturer and Faculty Member of Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 2. Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Health Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 3. Department of Endocrinology and Female Infertility at Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. 4. Department of Urology, Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 5. Associate Professor of Health Sciences Research Center, Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of behavioral intervention program and vaginal cones on stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 60 women aged 25-65 years with stress urinary incontinence were randomly divided into two groups, those who participated in a behavioral intervention program (n=30) and those who used vaginal cones (n=30). The women in the behavioral intervention group were instructed on pelvic floor exercise and bladder control strategies. In the other group, pelvic floor exercises were performed using the vaginal cones. All participants were treated for 12 weeks and followed-up every 2 weeks. The subjective changes in severity of stress urinary incontinence were measured using a detection stress urinary incontinence severity questionnaire, leakage index, and a 3-day urinary diary. The objective changes were measured by pad test. For better evaluation of the effects, two questionnaires were used: Incontinence Quality of Life and King's Health Questionnaire. RESULTS: Among the 51 women who completed the study, 25 subjects were in the vaginal cones group and 26 participated in the behavioral intervention program. The changes in leakage rate on pad test and leakage index in the behavioral intervention program group were significantly higher than in the vaginal cones group (p=0.001 and p=0.008, respectively), but the severity of stress urinary incontinence was not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.2). The changes in strength of the pelvic floor, Incontinence Quality of Life, and King's Health Questionnaire scores showed no significant differences between the two groups after 12 weeks of intervention. CONCLUSION: Vaginal cones and behavioral intervention programs are both effective methods of treatment for mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence, but the behavioral intervention program is superior to vaginal cones in terms of cost-effectiveness and side effects.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of behavioral intervention program and vaginal cones on stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 60 women aged 25-65 years with stress urinary incontinence were randomly divided into two groups, those who participated in a behavioral intervention program (n=30) and those who used vaginal cones (n=30). The women in the behavioral intervention group were instructed on pelvic floor exercise and bladder control strategies. In the other group, pelvic floor exercises were performed using the vaginal cones. All participants were treated for 12 weeks and followed-up every 2 weeks. The subjective changes in severity of stress urinary incontinence were measured using a detection stress urinary incontinence severity questionnaire, leakage index, and a 3-day urinary diary. The objective changes were measured by pad test. For better evaluation of the effects, two questionnaires were used: Incontinence Quality of Life and King's Health Questionnaire. RESULTS: Among the 51 women who completed the study, 25 subjects were in the vaginal cones group and 26 participated in the behavioral intervention program. The changes in leakage rate on pad test and leakage index in the behavioral intervention program group were significantly higher than in the vaginal cones group (p=0.001 and p=0.008, respectively), but the severity of stress urinary incontinence was not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.2). The changes in strength of the pelvic floor, Incontinence Quality of Life, and King's Health Questionnaire scores showed no significant differences between the two groups after 12 weeks of intervention. CONCLUSION: Vaginal cones and behavioral intervention programs are both effective methods of treatment for mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence, but the behavioral intervention program is superior to vaginal cones in terms of cost-effectiveness and side effects.
Authors: Paul Abrams; Linda Cardozo; Magnus Fall; Derek Griffiths; Peter Rosier; Ulf Ulmsten; Philip Van Kerrebroeck; Arne Victor; Alan Wein Journal: Urology Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Leslee L Subak; Jeanette S Brown; Stephen R Kraus; Linda Brubaker; Feng Lin; Holly E Richter; Catherine S Bradley; Deborah Grady Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 7.661