App-Based Treatment in Primary Care for Urinary Incontinence: A Pragmatic, Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Electronic application (app)-based treatment is promising for common diseases with good conservative management options, such as urinary incontinence (UI) in women, but its effectiveness compared with usual care is unclear. This study set out to determine if app-based treatment for women with stress, urgency, or mixed UI was noninferior to usual care in the primary care setting. METHODS: The URinControl trial is a pragmatic, noninferiority randomized controlled trial in Dutch primary care including adult women with 2 episodes of UI per week. From July 2015 to July 2018, we screened 350 women for eligibility. A stand-alone app-based treatment with pelvic floor muscle and bladder training (URinControl) was compared with usual care according to the Dutch general practitioner guideline for UI treatment. Outcomes measured were change in symptom severity score from baseline to 4 months (primary outcome), impact on disease-specific quality of life, patient-perceived improvement, and number of UI episodes. Noninferiority (<1.5 points) was assessed with linear regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 262 eligible women were randomized equally; 195 of them had follow-up through 4 months. The change in symptom severity with app-based treatment (-2.16 points; 95% CI, -2.67 to -1.65) was noninferior to that with usual care (-2.56 points; 95% CI, -3.28 to -1.84), with a mean difference of 0.058 points (95% CI, -0.776 to 0.891) between groups. Neither treatment was superior to the other, and both groups showed improvements in outcome measures after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: App-based treatment for women with UI was at least as effective as usual care in the primary care setting. As such, app-based treatments, with their potential advantages of privacy, accessibility, and lower cost, may provide women with a good alternative to consultation.

Favourable results of a new intraoperative and postoperative filtered autologous blood re-transfusion system in total hip arthroplasty: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: A new intraoperative filtered salvaged blood re-transfusion system has been developed for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) that filters and re-transfuses the blood that is lost during THA. This system is intended to increase postoperative haemoglobin (Hb) levels, reduce perioperative net blood loss and reduce the need for allogeneic transfusions. It supposedly does not have the disadvantages of intraoperative cell-washing/separating re-transfusion systems, such as extensive procedure, high costs and need for specialised personnel. To re-transfuse as much as blood as possible, postoperatively drained blood was also re-transfused. METHODS: A randomised, controlled, blinded, single-centre trial was conducted in which 118 THA patients were randomised to an intraoperative autologous blood re-transfusion (ABT) filter system combined with a postoperative ABT filter unit or high-vacuum closed-suction drainage. RESULTS: On average, 577 ml of blood was re-transfused in the ABT group: 323 ml collected intraoperatively and 254 ml collected postoperatively. Hb level was higher in the ABT vs the high-vacuum drainage group: 11.4 vs. 10.8 g/dl, p = 0.02 on day one (primary endpoint) and 11.0 vs. 10.4 g/dl, p = 0.007 on day three. Total blood loss was less in the autotransfusion group: 1472 vs. 1678 ml, p = 0.03. Allogeneic transfusions were needed in 3.6 % of patients in the ABT group and 6.5 % in the drainage group, p = 0.68. CONCLUSION: The use of a new intraoperative ABT filter system combined with a postoperative ABT unit resulted in higher postoperative Hb levels and less total blood loss compared with a high-vacuum drain following THA.

Postoperative autologous blood transfusion drain or no drain in primary total hip arthroplasty? A randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Postoperative maintenance of high haemoglobin (Hb) levels and avoidance of homologous blood transfusions is important in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The introduction of a postoperative drainage autologous blood transfusion (ABT) system or no drainage following THA has resulted in reduction of homologous blood transfusion requirements compared with closed-suction drains. The purpose of this study was to examine which regimen is superior following THA. METHODS: A randomised controlled blinded prospective single-centre study was conducted in which 100 THA patients were randomly allocated to ABT or no drainage. The primary endpoint was the Hb level on the first postoperative day. RESULTS: The postoperative collected drained blood loss was 274 (±154) ml in the ABT group, of which 129 (±119) ml was retransfused (0-400). There was no statistical difference in Hb levels on the first postoperative day (ABT vs no drainage: Hb 11.0 vs 10.9 g/dl), on consecutive days (day 3: Hb 10.7 vs 10.2, p = 0.08) or in total blood loss (1,506 vs 1,633 ml), homologous transfusions, pain scores, Harris Hip Score, SF-36 scores, length of hospital stay or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a postoperative autologous blood retransfusion drain did not result in significantly higher postoperative Hb levels or in less total blood loss or fewer homologous blood transfusions compared with no drain.

The effectiveness of the Bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: what is the evidence?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In the Western world, the Bobath Concept or neurodevelopmental treatment is the most popular treatment approach used in stroke rehabilitation, yet the superiority of the Bobath Concept as the optimal type of treatment has not been established. This systematic review of randomized, controlled trials aimed to evaluate the available evidence for the effectiveness of the Bobath Concept in stroke rehabilitation. Method- A systematic literature search was conducted in the bibliographic databases MEDLINE and CENTRAL (March 2008) and by screening the references of selected publications (including reviews). Studies in which the effects of the Bobath Concept were investigated were classified into the following domains: sensorimotor control of upper and lower limb; sitting and standing, balance control, and dexterity; mobility; activities of daily living; health-related quality of life; and cost-effectiveness. Due to methodological heterogeneity within the selected studies, statistical pooling was not considered. Two independent researchers rated all retrieved literature according to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale from which a best evidence synthesis was derived to determine the strength of the evidence for both effectiveness of the Bobath Concept and for its superiority over other approaches. RESULTS: The search strategy initially identified 2263 studies. After selection based on predetermined criteria, finally, 16 studies involving 813 patients with stroke were included for further analysis. There was no evidence of superiority of Bobath on sensorimotor control of upper and lower limb, dexterity, mobility, activities of daily living, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Only limited evidence was found for balance control in favor of Bobath. Because of the limited evidence available, no best evidence synthesis was applied for the health-related quality-of-life domain and cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review confirms that overall the Bobath Concept is not superior to other approaches. Based on best evidence synthesis, no evidence is available for the superiority of any approach. This review has highlighted many methodological shortcomings in the studies reviewed; further high-quality trials need to be published. Evidence-based guidelines rather than therapist preference should serve as a framework from which therapists should derive the most effective treatment.