Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women

Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C. Hay-Smith*, Muhammad Imran Omar

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background
Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first‐line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women

Objectives
To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and CINAHL (January 1982 to 6 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles.

Selection criteria
We included randomised or quasi‐randomised trials with two or more arms, of women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary
incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or
consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberCD010551
JournalCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Volume2013
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 3 Nov 2015

Fingerprint

Pelvic Floor
Urinary Incontinence
Muscles
Arm
Therapeutics
MEDLINE
Pessaries
Conflict of Interest
Stress Urinary Incontinence
Urodynamics
Cholinergic Antagonists
Patient Selection
Urinary Bladder
Referral and Consultation
Drug Therapy
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women. / Ayeleke, Reuben Olugbenga; Hay-Smith, E. Jean C.; Omar, Muhammad Imran.

In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Vol. 2013, No. 6, CD010551, 03.11.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f9424faf86004bb5a77421047c88cf52,
title = "Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women",
abstract = "BackgroundPelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first‐line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women Objectives To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and CINAHL (January 1982 to 6 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria We included randomised or quasi‐randomised trials with two or more arms, of women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.",
author = "Ayeleke, {Reuben Olugbenga} and Hay-Smith, {E. Jean C.} and Omar, {Muhammad Imran}",
note = "This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure, Cochrane Programme Grant or Cochrane Incentive funding to the Incontinence Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health. Version History Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Review; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3; 3 November 2015 Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Review; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub2; 20 November 2013 Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Protocol; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551; 6 June 2013",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3",
language = "English",
volume = "2013",
journal = "Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews",
issn = "1469-493X",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women

AU - Ayeleke, Reuben Olugbenga

AU - Hay-Smith, E. Jean C.

AU - Omar, Muhammad Imran

N1 - This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure, Cochrane Programme Grant or Cochrane Incentive funding to the Incontinence Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health. Version History Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Review; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3; 3 November 2015 Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Review; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub2; 20 November 2013 Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women; Protocol; Reuben Olugbenga Ayeleke, E. Jean C Hay‐Smith, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010551; 6 June 2013

PY - 2015/11/3

Y1 - 2015/11/3

N2 - BackgroundPelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first‐line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women Objectives To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and CINAHL (January 1982 to 6 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria We included randomised or quasi‐randomised trials with two or more arms, of women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.

AB - BackgroundPelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first‐line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women Objectives To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and CINAHL (January 1982 to 6 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria We included randomised or quasi‐randomised trials with two or more arms, of women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016453041&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3

DO - 10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3

M3 - Article

VL - 2013

JO - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

JF - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

SN - 1469-493X

IS - 6

M1 - CD010551

ER -