Women's preferences for pelvic floor screening in sport and exercise: a mixed-methods study integrating survey and interview data in Australian women.

OBJECTIVES: One in two women experiencing pelvic floor (PF) symptoms stop playing sport or exercising. The study examines the perspective of women with PF symptoms to inform acceptable screening practices within sport and exercise settings. METHODS: Explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods design. Phase 1: survey of 18-65 years, symptomatic, Australian women (n=4556). Phase 2: semistructured interviews with a subset of survey participants (n=23). Integration occurred through connection of phases (study design, sampling) and joint display of data. RESULTS: Findings are represented in three threads: (1) 'women (not) telling'; a majority of women had told no-one within a sport or exercise setting about their PF symptoms due to shame/embarrassment, lack of pelvic health knowledge and not wanting to initiate the conversation, (2) 'asking women (screening for PF symptoms)'; women endorsed including PF symptom questions within existing sport and exercise screening practices but only when conducted in a respectful and considered manner and (3) 'creating safety'; professionals can assist women to disclose by demonstrating expertise, trustworthiness and competency. If health and exercise professionals are provided with appropriate training, they could raise pelvic health awareness and promote a supportive and safe sport and exercise culture. CONCLUSION: Women with PF symptoms support health and exercise professionals initiating conversations about PF health to normalise the topic, and include PF symptoms among other pre-exercise screening questions. However, women should be informed on the relevance and potential benefits of PF screening prior to commencing. Safe screening practices require building trust by providing information, gaining consent, displaying comfort and genuine interest, and being knowledgeable within one's scope of practice to the provision of advice, exercise modifications and referral as appropriate.

Narrative review of pelvic floor muscle training for childbearing women-why, when, what, and how.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Urinary incontinence (UI) is prevalent during pregnancy and postpartum. UI in pregnancy strongly predicts UI postpartum and later in life. UI reduces women's wellbeing and quality of life and presents a significant burden to healthcare resource. METHODS: A narrative review summarizing quantitative and qualitative evidence about pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) for prevention and treatment of UI for childbearing women. RESULTS: There are clinically important reductions in the risk of developing UI in pregnancy and after delivery for pregnant women who start PFMT during pregnancy, and PFMT offers additional benefits preventing prolapse and improving sexual function. If women develop UI during pregnancy or postpartum then PFMT is an appropriate first-line treatment. For novice exercisers, a programme comprising eight contractions, with 8-s holds, three times a day, 3 days a week, for at least 3 months is a reasonable minimum and 'generic' prescription. All women need clear accurate verbal instruction in how to do PFMT. Incontinent women, and women who cannot do a correct contraction, require referral for pelvic floor rehabilitation. Behavioural support from maternity care providers (MCPs)-increasing women's opportunity, capability, and motivation for PFMT-is as important as the exercise prescription. CONCLUSION: PFMT is effective to prevent and treat UI in childbearing women. All pregnant and postpartum women, at every contact with a MCP, should be asked if they are continent. Continent women need exercise prescription and behavioural support to do PFMT to prevent UI. Incontinent women require appropriate referral for diagnosis or treatment.

Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women.

BACKGROUND: About one-third of women have urinary incontinence (UI) and up to one-tenth have faecal incontinence (FI) after childbirth. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is commonly recommended during pregnancy and after birth for both preventing and treating incontinence. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of PFMT for preventing or treating urinary and faecal incontinence in pregnant or postnatal women, and summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and handsearched journals and conference proceedings (searched 7 August 2019), and the reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials in which one arm included PFMT. Another arm was no PFMT, usual antenatal or postnatal care, another control condition, or an alternative PFMT intervention. Populations included women who, at randomisation, were continent (PFMT for prevention) or incontinent (PFMT for treatment), and a mixed population of women who were one or the other (PFMT for prevention or treatment). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias. We extracted data and assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 46 trials involving 10,832 women from 21 countries. Overall, trials were small to moderately-sized. The PFMT programmes and control conditions varied considerably and were often poorly described. Many trials were at moderate to high risk of bias. Two participants in a study of 43 pregnant women performing PFMT for prevention of incontinence withdrew due to pelvic floor pain. No other trials reported any adverse effects of PFMT. Prevention of UI: compared with usual care, continent pregnant women performing antenatal PFMT probably have a lower risk of reporting UI in late pregnancy (62% less; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.72; 6 trials, 624 women; moderate-quality evidence). Antenatal PFMT slightly decreased the risk of UI in the mid-postnatal period (more than three to six months' postpartum) (29% less; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95; 5 trials, 673 women; high-quality evidence). There was insufficient information available for the late postnatal period (more than six to 12 months) to determine effects at this time point (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.21; 1 trial, 44 women; low-quality evidence). Treatment of UI: compared with usual care, there is no evidence that antenatal PFMT in incontinent women decreases incontinence in late pregnancy (very low-quality evidence), or in the mid-(RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.24; 1 trial, 187 women; low-quality evidence), or late postnatal periods (very low-quality evidence). Similarly, in postnatal women with persistent UI, there is no evidence that PFMT results in a difference in UI at more than six to 12 months postpartum (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.07; 3 trials; 696 women; low-quality evidence). Mixed prevention and treatment approach to UI: antenatal PFMT in women with or without UI probably decreases UI risk in late pregnancy (22% less; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94; 11 trials, 3307 women; moderate-quality evidence), and may reduce the risk slightly in the mid-postnatal period (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97; 5 trials, 1921 women; low-quality evidence). There was no evidence that antenatal PFMT reduces the risk of UI at late postpartum (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.14; 2 trials, 244 women; moderate-quality evidence). For PFMT started after delivery, there was uncertainty about the effect on UI risk in the late postnatal period (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.09; 3 trials, 826 women; moderate-quality evidence). Faecal incontinence: eight trials reported FI outcomes. In postnatal women with persistent FI, it was uncertain whether PFMT reduced incontinence in the late postnatal period compared to usual care (very low-quality evidence). In women with or without FI, there was no evidence that antenatal PFMT led to a difference in the prevalence of FI in late pregnancy (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.14; 3 trials, 910 women; moderate-quality evidence). Similarly, for postnatal PFMT in a mixed population, there was no evidence that PFMT reduces the risk of FI in the late postnatal period (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.21; 1 trial, 107 women, low-quality evidence). There was little evidence about effects on UI or FI beyond 12 months' postpartum. There were few incontinence-specific quality of life data and little consensus on how to measure it. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that early, structured PFMT in early pregnancy for continent women may prevent the onset of UI in late pregnancy and postpartum. Population approaches (recruiting antenatal women regardless of continence status) may have a smaller effect on UI, although the reasons for this are unclear. A population-based approach for delivering postnatal PFMT is not likely to reduce UI. Uncertainty surrounds the effects of PFMT as a treatment for UI in antenatal and postnatal women, which contrasts with the more established effectiveness in mid-life women. It is possible that the effects of PFMT might be greater with targeted rather than mixed prevention and treatment approaches, and in certain groups of women. Hypothetically, for instance, women with a high body mass index (BMI) are at risk of UI. Such uncertainties require further testing and data on duration of effect are also needed. The physiological and behavioural aspects of exercise programmes must be described for both PFMT and control groups, and how much PFMT women in both groups do, to increase understanding of what works and for whom. Few data exist on FI and it is important that this is included in any future trials. It is essential that future trials use valid measures of incontinence-specific quality of life for both urinary and faecal incontinence. In addition to further clinical studies, economic evaluations assessing the cost-effectiveness of different management strategies for FI and UI are needed.

Using a citizens' jury approach to determine a good nutrition resource for pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE: The development of user-friendly nutrition resources for pregnant women seldom involves end-users. This qualitative study used a citizens' jury approach to determine if our modification of a longstanding, frequently used dietitian-informed diet and diabetes booklet was deemed to be a good healthy eating resource for pregnant women. DESIGN: Midwives recruited thirteen first-time pregnant women not requiring specialist obstetric care or specialist dietetic advice for any reason. Participants were sent a copy of the modified healthy eating in pregnancy booklet prior to 'jury day'. Five women were unable to attend the citizens' jury citing reasons such as early labour. At the jury, five experts presented evidence. Participants adjourned, with an independent facilitator, to 'deliberate' as to whether the resource was suitable or not. The verdict was presented, and subsequent discussion was audio-recorded, transcribed and inductively content analysed. SETTING: Southland, New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women aged 19-35 years (n 8), of whom half had a household income <$NZ30 000. RESULTS: The verdict was 'Yes'; the resource was good. Three themes were derived: communication of health information, resource content and harm reduction in pregnancy. Based on these data, ways to enhance the quality and usability of the booklet were evident. CONCLUSIONS: Citizens' juries can be used to obtain an independent assessment by end-users of health resources. Our modified diet and diabetes booklet was considered suitable for providing healthy eating advice to pregnant women. Inclusion of end-users' perspectives is critical for end-user relevant content, comprehension and resource credibility.

Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is the most commonly used physical therapy treatment for women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). It is sometimes also recommended for mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) and, less commonly, urgency urinary incontinence (UUI).This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2001 and last updated in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of PFMT for women with urinary incontinence (UI) in comparison to no treatment, placebo or sham treatments, or other inactive control treatments; and summarise the findings of relevant economic evaluations. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (searched 12 February 2018), which contains trials identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, handsearching of journals and conference proceedings, and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with SUI, UUI or MUI (based on symptoms, signs or urodynamics). One arm of the trial included PFMT. Another arm was a no treatment, placebo, sham or other inactive control treatment arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias. We extracted and cross-checked data. A third review author resolved disagreements. We processed data as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We subgrouped trials by diagnosis of UI. We undertook formal meta-analysis when appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 31 trials (10 of which were new for this update) involving 1817 women from 14 countries. Overall, trials were of small-to-moderate size, with follow-ups generally less than 12 months and many were at moderate risk of bias. There was considerable variation in the intervention's content and duration, study populations and outcome measures. There was only one study of women with MUI and only one study with UUI alone, with no data on cure, cure or improvement, or number of episodes of UI for these subgroups.Symptomatic cure of UI at the end of treatment: compared with no treatment or inactive control treatments, women with SUI who were in the PFMT groups were eight times more likely to report cure (56% versus 6%; risk ratio (RR) 8.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.68 to 19.07; 4 trials, 165 women; high-quality evidence). For women with any type of UI, PFMT groups were five times more likely to report cure (35% versus 6%; RR 5.34, 95% CI 2.78 to 10.26; 3 trials, 290 women; moderate-quality evidence).Symptomatic cure or improvement of UI at the end of treatment: compared with no treatment or inactive control treatments, women with SUI who were in the PFMT groups were six times more likely to report cure or improvement (74% versus 11%; RR 6.33, 95% CI 3.88 to 10.33; 3 trials, 242 women; moderate-quality evidence). For women with any type of UI, PFMT groups were two times more likely to report cure or improvement than women in the control groups (67% versus 29%; RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.64 to 3.47; 2 trials, 166 women; moderate-quality evidence).UI-specific symptoms and quality of life (QoL) at the end of treatment: compared with no treatment or inactive control treatments, women with SUI who were in the PFMT group were more likely to report significant improvement in UI symptoms (7 trials, 376 women; moderate-quality evidence), and to report significant improvement in UI QoL (6 trials, 348 women; low-quality evidence). For any type of UI, women in the PFMT group were more likely to report significant improvement in UI symptoms (1 trial, 121 women; moderate-quality evidence) and to report significant improvement in UI QoL (4 trials, 258 women; moderate-quality evidence). Finally, for women with mixed UI treated with PFMT, there was one small trial (12 women) reporting better QoL.Leakage episodes in 24 hours at the end of treatment: PFMT reduced leakage episodes by one in women with SUI (mean difference (MD) 1.23 lower, 95% CI 1.78 lower to 0.68 lower; 7 trials, 432 women; moderate-quality evidence) and in women with all types of UI (MD 1.00 lower, 95% CI 1.37 lower to 0.64 lower; 4 trials, 349 women; moderate-quality evidence).Leakage on short clinic-based pad tests at the end of treatment: women with SUI in the PFMT groups lost significantly less urine in short (up to one hour) pad tests. The comparison showed considerable heterogeneity but the findings still favoured PFMT when using a random-effects model (MD 9.71 g lower, 95% CI 18.92 lower to 0.50 lower; 4 trials, 185 women; moderate-quality evidence). For women with all types of UI, PFMT groups also reported less urine loss on short pad tests than controls (MD 3.72 g lower, 95% CI 5.46 lower to 1.98 lower; 2 trials, 146 women; moderate-quality evidence).Women in the PFMT group were also more satisfied with treatment and their sexual outcomes were better. Adverse events were rare and, in the two trials that did report any, they were minor. The findings of the review were largely supported by the 'Summary of findings' tables, but most of the evidence was downgraded to moderate on methodological grounds. The exception was 'participant-perceived cure' in women with SUI, which was rated as high quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the data available, we can be confident that PFMT can cure or improve symptoms of SUI and all other types of UI. It may reduce the number of leakage episodes, the quantity of leakage on the short pad tests in the clinic and symptoms on UI-specific symptom questionnaires. The authors of the one economic evaluation identified for the Brief Economic Commentary reported that the cost-effectiveness of PFMT looks promising. The findings of the review suggest that PFMT could be included in first-line conservative management programmes for women with UI. The long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PFMT needs to be further researched.

Untangling chronic pain and post-concussion symptoms: the significance of depression.

OBJECTIVES: Post-concussion-like symptoms (PCS) are common in patients without a history of brain injury, such as those with chronic pain (CP). This exploratory study examined neuro-cognitive and psychological functioning in patients with PCS following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) or CP, to assess unique and overlapping phenomenology. METHODS: In this case-control study, participants (n = 102) with chronic symptoms after mTBI (n = 45) were matched with mTBI recovered (n = 31) and CP groups (n = 26), on age, gender, ethnicity and education. Psychological status, cognitive functioning, health symptoms, beliefs and behaviours were examined. RESULTS: Participants who had not recovered from an mTBI and participants with CP did not differ in terms of PCS symptoms, quality of life, distress or illness behaviours, however, the CP group endorsed fewer subjective cognitive problems, more negative expectations about recovery and more distress (p < 0.05). On cognitive testing participants who had not recovered from an mTBI demonstrated greater difficulties with attention (p < 0.01) although differences disappeared when depression was controlled in the analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Unique patterns associated with each condition were evident though caution is required in attributing PCS and cognitive symptoms to a brain injury in people with mTBI presenting with chronic pain and/or depression. Psychological constructs such as illness and recovery beliefs appear to be important to consider in the development of treatment interventions.

Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women.

BACKGROUND: About one-third of women have urinary incontinence and up to one-tenth have faecal incontinence after childbirth. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is commonly recommended during pregnancy and after birth for both prevention and treatment of incontinence.This is an update of a review previously published in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in the prevention or treatment of urinary and faecal incontinence in pregnant or postnatal women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (16 February 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials in pregnant or postnatal women. One arm of the trial included PFMT. Another arm was no PFMT, usual antenatal or postnatal care, another control condition, or an alternative PFMT intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias. We extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Populations included: women who were continent (PFMT for prevention), women who were incontinent (PFMT for treatment) at randomisation and a mixed population of women who were one or the other (PFMT for prevention or treatment). We assessed quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 38 trials (17 of which were new for this update) involving 9892 women from 20 countries. Overall, trials were small to moderate sized, and the PFMT programmes and control conditions varied considerably and were often poorly described. Many trials were at moderate to high risk of bias. Other than two reports of pelvic floor pain, trials reported no harmful effects of PFMT.Prevention of urinary incontinence: compared with usual care, continent pregnant women performing antenatal PFMT may have had a lower risk of reporting urinary incontinence in late pregnancy (62% less; risk ratio (RR) for incontinence 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.72; 6 trials, 624 women; low-quality evidence). Similarly, antenatal PFMT decreased the risk of urinary incontinence in the mid-postnatal period (more than three to six months' postpartum) (29% less; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95; 5 trials, 673 women; moderate-quality evidence). There was insufficient information available for the late (more than six to 12 months') postnatal period to determine effects at this time point.Treatment of urinary incontinence: it is uncertain whether antenatal PFMT in incontinent women decreases incontinence in late pregnancy compared to usual care (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.13; 3 trials, 345 women; very low-quality evidence). This uncertainty extends into the mid- (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.24; 1 trial, 187 women; very low-quality evidence) and late (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.93; 2 trials, 869 women; very low-quality evidence) postnatal periods. In postnatal women with persistent urinary incontinence, it was unclear whether PFMT reduced urinary incontinence at more than six to 12 months' postpartum (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.07; 3 trials; 696 women; very low-quality evidence).Mixed prevention and treatment approach to urinary incontinence: antenatal PFMT in women with or without urinary incontinence (mixed population) may decrease urinary incontinence risk in late pregnancy (26% less; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.90; 9 trials, 3164 women; low-quality evidence) and the mid-postnatal period (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97; 5 trials, 1921 women; very low-quality evidence). It is uncertain if antenatal PFMT reduces urinary incontinence risk late postpartum (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.14; 2 trials, 244 women; low-quality evidence). For PFMT begun after delivery, there was considerable uncertainty about the effect on urinary incontinence risk in the late postnatal period (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.09; 3 trials, 826 women; very low-quality evidence).Faecal incontinence: six trials reported faecal incontinence outcomes. In postnatal women with persistent faecal incontinence, it was uncertain whether PFMT reduced incontinence in the late postnatal period compared to usual care (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.94; 2 trials; 620 women; very low-quality evidence). In women with or without faecal incontinence (mixed population), antenatal PFMT led to little or no difference in the prevalence of faecal incontinence in late pregnancy (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.25; 2 trials, 867 women; moderate-quality evidence). For postnatal PFMT in a mixed population, there was considerable uncertainty about the effect on faecal incontinence in the late postnatal period (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.21; 1 trial, 107 women, very low-quality evidence).There was little evidence about effects on urinary or faecal incontinence beyond 12 months' postpartum. There were few incontinence-specific quality of life data and little consensus on how to measure it. We found no data on health economics outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Targeting continent antenatal women early in pregnancy and offering a structured PFMT programme may prevent the onset of urinary incontinence in late pregnancy and postpartum. However, the cost-effectiveness of this is unknown. Population approaches (recruiting antenatal women regardless of continence status) may have a smaller effect on urinary incontinence, although the reasons for this are unclear. It is uncertain whether a population-based approach for delivering postnatal PFMT is effective in reducing urinary incontinence. Uncertainty surrounds the effects of PFMT as a treatment for urinary incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women, which contrasts with the more established effectiveness in mid-life women.It is possible that the effects of PFMT might be greater with targeted rather than mixed prevention and treatment approaches and in certain groups of women. Hypothetically, for instance, women with a high body mass index are at risk factor for urinary incontinence. Such uncertainties require further testing and data on duration of effect are also needed. The physiological and behavioural aspects of exercise programmes must be described for both PFMT and control groups and how much PFMT women in both groups do, to increase understanding of what works and for whom.Few data exist on faecal incontinence or costs and it is important that both are included in any future trials. It is essential that future trials use valid measures of incontinence-specific quality of life for both urinary and faecal incontinence.

Once a clinician, always a clinician: a systematic review to develop a typology of clinician-researcher dual-role experiences in health research with patient-participants.

BACKGROUND: Many health researchers are clinicians. Dual-role experiences are common for clinician-researchers in research involving patient-participants, even if not their own patients. To extend the existing body of literature on why dual-role is experienced, we aimed to develop a typology of common catalysts for dual-role experiences to help clinician-researchers plan and implement methodologically and ethically sound research. METHODS: Systematic searching of Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase and Scopus (inception to 28.07.2014) for primary studies or first-person reflexive reports of clinician-researchers' dual-role experiences, supplemented by reference list checking and Google Scholar scoping searches. Included articles were loaded in NVivo for analysis. The coding was focused on how dual-role was evidenced for the clinician-researchers in research involving patients. Procedures were completed by one researcher (MB) and independently cross-checked by another (JHS). All authors contributed to extensive discussions to resolve all disagreements about initial coding and verify the final themes. RESULTS: Database searching located 7135 records, resulting in 29 included studies, with the addition of 7 studies through reference checks and scoping searches. Two overarching themes described the most common catalysts for dual-role experiences - ways a research role can involve patterns of behaviour typical of a clinical role, and the developing connection that starts to resemble a clinician-patient relationship. Five subthemes encapsulated the clinical patterns commonly repeated in research settings (clinical queries, perceived agenda, helping hands, uninvited clinical expert, and research or therapy) and five subthemes described concerns about the researcher-participant relationship (clinical assumptions, suspicion and holding back, revelations, over-identification, and manipulation). Clinician-researchers use their clinical skills in health research in ways that set up a relationship resembling that of clinician-patient. Clinicians' ingrained orientation to patients' needs can be in tension with their research role, and can set up ethical and methodological challenges. CONCLUSION: The typology we developed outlines the common ways dual-role is experienced in research involving clinician-researchers and patient-participants, and perhaps the inevitability of the experience given the primacy accorded to patient well-being. The typology offers clinician-researchers a framework for grappling with the ethical and methodological implications of dual-role throughout the research process, including planning, implementation, monitoring and reporting.

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

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. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria, comprising women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI); they compared PFMT added to another active treatment (585 women) with the same active treatment alone (579 women). The pre-specified comparisons were reported by single trials, except bladder training, which was reported by two trials, and electrical stimulation, which was reported by three trials. However, only two of the three trials reporting electrical stimulation could be pooled, as one of the trials did not report any relevant data. We considered the included trials to be at unclear risk of bias for most of the domains, predominantly due to the lack of adequate information in a number of trials. This affected our rating of the quality of evidence. The majority of the trials did not report the primary outcomes specified in the review (cure or improvement, quality of life) or measured the outcomes in different ways. Effect estimates from small, single trials across a number of comparisons were indeterminate for key outcomes relating to symptoms, and we rated the quality of evidence, using the GRADE approach, as either low or very low. More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in two trials comparing PFMT added to electrical stimulation to electrical stimulation alone, in women with SUI, but this was not statistically significant (9/26 (35%) versus 5/30 (17%); risk ratio (RR) 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 5.38). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. There was moderate-quality evidence from a single trial investigating women with SUI, UUI or MUI that a higher proportion of women who received a combination of PFMT and heat and steam generating sheet reported a cure compared to those who received the sheet alone: 19/37 (51%) versus 8/37 (22%) with a RR of 2.38, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.73). More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in another trial comparing PFMT added to vaginal cones to vaginal cones alone, but this was not statistically significant (14/15 (93%) versus 14/19 (75%); RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.71). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. Only one trial evaluating PFMT when added to drug therapy provided information about adverse events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.60; very low-quality evidence).With regard to condition-specific quality of life, there were no statistically significant differences between women (with SUI, UUI or MUI) who received PFMT added to bladder training and those who received bladder training alone at three months after treatment, on either the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-Revised scale (mean difference (MD) -5.90, 95% CI -35.53 to 23.73) or on the Urogenital Distress Inventory scale (MD -18.90, 95% CI -37.92 to 0.12). A similar pattern of results was observed between women with SUI who received PFMT plus either a continence pessary or duloxetine and those who received the continence pessary or duloxetine alone. In all these comparisons, the quality of the evidence for the reported critical outcomes ranged from moderate to very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review found insufficient evidence to state whether or not there were additional effects by adding PFMT to other active treatments when compared with the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence (SUI, UUI or MUI) in women. These results should be interpreted with caution as most of the comparisons were investigated in small, single trials. None of the trials in this review were large enough to provide reliable evidence. Also, none of the included trials reported data on adverse events associated with the PFMT regimen, thereby making it very difficult to evaluate the safety of PFMT.

Goal setting and strategies to enhance goal pursuit for adults with acquired disability participating in rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Goal setting is considered a key component of rehabilitation for adults with acquired disability, yet there is little consensus regarding the best strategies for undertaking goal setting and in which clinical contexts. It has also been unclear what effect, if any, goal setting has on health outcomes after rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of goal setting and strategies to enhance the pursuit of goals (i.e. how goals and progress towards goals are communicated, used, or shared) on improving health outcomes in adults with acquired disability participating in rehabilitation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, four other databases and three trials registers to December 2013, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We did not impose any language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of goal setting or strategies to enhance goal pursuit in the context of adult rehabilitation for acquired disability. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed search results for inclusion. Grey literature searches were conducted and reviewed by a single author. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 studies (27 RCTs, 6 cluster-RCTs, and 6 quasi-RCTs) involving 2846 participants in total. Studies ranged widely regarding clinical context and participants' primary health conditions. The most common health conditions included musculoskeletal disorders, brain injury, chronic pain, mental health conditions, and cardiovascular disease.Eighteen studies compared goal setting, with or without strategies to enhance goal pursuit, to no goal setting. These studies provide very low quality evidence that including any type of goal setting in the practice of adult rehabilitation is better than no goal setting for health-related quality of life or self-reported emotional status (8 studies; 446 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.88, indicative of a moderate effect size) and self-efficacy (3 studies; 108 participants; SMD 1.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.49, indicative of a moderate to large effect size). The evidence is inconclusive regarding whether goal setting results in improvements in social participation or activity levels, body structure or function, or levels of patient engagement in the rehabilitation process. Insufficient data are available to determine whether or not goal setting is associated with more or fewer adverse events compared to no goal setting.Fourteen studies compared structured goal setting approaches, with or without strategies to enhance goal pursuit, to 'usual care' that may have involved some goal setting but where no structured approach was followed. These studies provide very low quality evidence that more structured goal setting results in higher patient self-efficacy (2 studies; 134 participants; SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.71, indicative of a small effect size) and low quality evidence for greater satisfaction with service delivery (5 studies; 309 participants; SMD 0.33, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.56, indicative of a small effect size). The evidence was inconclusive regarding whether more structured goal setting approaches result in higher health-related quality of life or self-reported emotional status, social participation, activity levels, or improvements in body structure or function. Three studies in this group reported on adverse events (death, re-hospitalisation, or worsening symptoms), but insufficient data are available to determine whether structured goal setting is associated with more or fewer adverse events than usual care.A moderate degree of heterogeneity was observed in outcomes across all studies, but an insufficient number of studies was available to permit subgroup analysis to explore the reasons for this heterogeneity. The review also considers studies which investigate the effects of different approaches to enhancing goal pursuit, and studies which investigate different structured goal setting approaches. It also reports on secondary outcomes including goal attainment and healthcare utilisation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is some very low quality evidence that goal setting may improve some outcomes for adults receiving rehabilitation for acquired disability. The best of this evidence appears to favour positive effects for psychosocial outcomes (i.e. health-related quality of life, emotional status, and self-efficacy) rather than physical ones. Due to study limitations, there is considerable uncertainty regarding these effects however, and further research is highly likely to change reported estimates of effect.

Adherence, tolerance and effectiveness of two different pelvic support belts as a treatment for pregnancy-related symphyseal pain - a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-related pubic symphysis pain is relatively common and can significantly interfere with daily activities. Physiotherapist-prescribed pelvic support belts are a treatment option, but little evidence exists to support their use. This pilot compared two pelvic belts to determine effectiveness (symptomatic relief), tolerance (comfort) and adherence (frequency, duration of use). METHODS: Unblinded, 2-arm, single-center, randomized (1:1) parallel-group trial. Twenty pregnant women recruited from the community (Dunedin, New Zealand), with physiotherapist-diagnosed symphyseal pain, were randomly allocated to wear either a flexible or rigid belt for three weeks. One author, not involved in data collection, randomized the allocation to trial group. The unblinded primary outcome was the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Secondary outcomes were pain intensity during the preceding 24 hours and preceding week (visual analogue scale [VAS]), and disability (Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire [MODQ]). Duration of use (hours) was recorded daily by text messaging. Participants were assessed at baseline, by weekly phone interviews and at intervention completion (three weeks). To assess comfort, women wore the alternate belt in the fourth week. RESULTS: Twenty pregnant women (mean ± SD age, 29.4 ± 6.5 years; mean gestation at baseline, 30.8 ± 5.2 weeks) were randomized to treatment groups (flexible = 10, rigid =10) and all were included in analysis. When adjusted for baseline, PSFS scores were not significantly different between groups at follow up (mean difference -0.1; 95% CI: -2.5 to 2.3; p =0.94). Pain in the preceding 24 hours reached statistical significance in favor of the flexible belt (VAS, p = 0.049). Combining both groups' data, function and pain were significantly improved at three weeks (mean difference -2.3; 95% CI: 1.2 to 3.5; p< 0.001). Belts were worn for an average of 4.9 ± 2.9 hours per day; women preferred the flexible belt. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: These preliminary results suggest the flexible pelvic support belt may be more effective in reducing pain and is potentially better tolerated than a rigid belt. Based on these data, a larger trial is both feasible and clinically useful. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12614000898651 , 25th August, 2014.

The contribution of psychological factors to recovery after mild traumatic brain injury: is cluster analysis a useful approach?

OBJECTIVES: Outcomes after mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) vary, with slow or incomplete recovery for a significant minority. This study examines whether groups of cases with shared psychological factors but with different injury outcomes could be identified using cluster analysis. METHOD: This is a prospective observational study following 147 adults presenting to a hospital-based emergency department or concussion services in Christchurch, New Zealand. This study examined associations between baseline demographic, clinical, psychological variables (distress, injury beliefs and symptom burden) and outcome 6 months later. A two-step approach to cluster analysis was applied (Ward's method to identify clusters, K-means to refine results). RESULTS: Three meaningful clusters emerged (high-adapters, medium-adapters, low-adapters). Baseline cluster-group membership was significantly associated with outcomes over time. High-adapters appeared recovered by 6-weeks and medium-adapters revealed improvements by 6-months. The low-adapters continued to endorse many symptoms, negative recovery expectations and distress, being significantly at risk for poor outcome more than 6-months after injury (OR (good outcome) = 0.12; CI = 0.03-0.53; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cluster analysis supported the notion that groups could be identified early post-injury based on psychological factors, with group membership associated with differing outcomes over time. Implications for clinical care providers regarding therapy targets and cases that may benefit from different intensities of intervention are discussed.

Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and fecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women: a short version Cochrane review.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is commonly recommended during pregnancy and after birth both for prevention and the treatment of incontinence. OBJECTIVES: Effect of pelvic floor muscle training compared to usual antenatal and postnatal care on incontinence. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialized Register; handsearching (searched February 7, 2012); the references of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in pregnant or postnatal women having pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) versus no PFMT or standard care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Duplicate trial assessment, selection and data abstraction. RESULTS: Twenty-two trials involving 8,485 women. Continent pregnant women (prevention) who had intensive antenatal PFMT were less likely to report urinary incontinence up to 6 months after delivery (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.95). Incontinent postnatal women (treatment) who received PFMT were less likely to report urinary incontinence 12 months after delivery (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35-1.03). In a mixed population (women with and without incontinence symptoms in late pregnancy or after delivery), PFMT did not reduce incontinence rates after delivery. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For women who are continent during pregnancy, PFMT may prevent urinary incontinence up to 6 months after delivery. The extent to which mixed prevention and treatment approaches to PFMT in the postnatal period are effective is less clear that is, offering advice on PFMT to all pregnant or postpartum women whether they have incontinence symptoms or not. There was little evidence about long-term effects for either urinary or fecal incontinence.

Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor muscle training is the most commonly used physical therapy treatment for women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). It is sometimes also recommended for mixed and, less commonly, urgency urinary incontinence. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of pelvic floor muscle training for women with urinary incontinence in comparison to no treatment, placebo or sham treatments, or other inactive control treatments. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (1999 onwards), MEDLINE (1966 onwards) and MEDLINE In-Process (2001 onwards), and handsearched journals and conference proceedings (searched 15 April 2013) and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials in women with stress, urgency or mixed urinary incontinence (based on symptoms, signs, or urodynamics). One arm of the trial included pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT). Another arm was a no treatment, placebo, sham, or other inactive control treatment arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials were independently assessed by two review authors for eligibility and methodological quality. Data were extracted then cross-checked. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Trials were subgrouped by diagnosis of urinary incontinence. Formal meta-analysis was undertaken when appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one trials involving 1281 women (665 PFMT, 616 controls) met the inclusion criteria; 18 trials (1051 women) contributed data to the forest plots. The trials were generally small to moderate sized, and many were at moderate risk of bias, based on the trial reports. There was considerable variation in the interventions used, study populations, and outcome measures. There were no studies of women with mixed or urgency urinary incontinence alone.Women with SUI who were in the PFMT groups were 8 times more likely than the controls to report that they were cured (46/82 (56.1%) versus 5/83 (6.0%), RR 8.38, 95% CI 3.68 to 19.07) and 17 times more likely to report cure or improvement (32/58 (55%) versus 2/63 (3.2%), RR 17.33, 95% CI 4.31 to 69.64). In trials in women with any type of urinary incontinence, PFMT groups were also more likely to report cure, or more cure and improvement than the women in the control groups, although the effect size was reduced. Women with either SUI or any type of urinary incontinence were also more satisfied with the active treatment, while women in the control groups were more likely to seek further treatment. Women treated with PFMT leaked urine less often, lost smaller amounts on the short office-based pad test, and emptied their bladders less often during the day. Their sexual outcomes were also better. Two trials (one small and one moderate size) reported some evidence of the benefit persisting for up to a year after treatment. Of the few adverse effects reported, none were serious.The findings of the review were largely supported by the summary of findings tables, but most of the evidence was down-graded to moderate on methodological grounds. The exception was 'Participant perceived cure' in women with SUI, which was rated as high quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review provides support for the widespread recommendation that PFMT be included in first-line conservative management programmes for women with stress and any type of urinary incontinence. Long-term effectiveness of PFMT needs to be further researched.

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

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, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 28 February 2013), EMBASE (January 1947 to 2013 Week 9), CINAHL (January 1982 to 5 March 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 30 May 2013), WHO ICTRP (searched 3 June 2013) and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials with two or more arms in 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. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven trials met the eligibility criteria for inclusion, comprising women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI), and they compared PFMT added to another active treatment (494 women) with the same active treatment alone (490 women). The pre-specified comparisons were reported by single trials except electrical stimulation which was reported by two trials. However, the two trials reporting electrical stimulation could not be pooled as one of the trials did not report any relevant data. We considered the included trials to be at unclear risk of bias for most of the domains, predominantly due to the lack of adequate information in a number of trials. This affected our rating of the quality of evidence. The majority of the trials did not report the primary outcomes specified in the review (cure/improvement, quality of life) or measured the outcomes in different ways. Effect estimates from small, single trials across a number of comparisons were indeterminate for key outcomes relating to symptoms and we rated the quality of evidence, using the GRADE approach, as either low or very low. There was moderate-quality evidence from a single trial investigating women with SUI, UUI or MUI that a higher proportion of women who received a combination of PFMT and heat and steam generating sheet reported cure compared to those who received the sheet alone: 19/37 (51%) versus 8/37 (22%) with a risk ratio (RR) of 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 4.73). More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in another trial comparing PFMT added to vaginal cones to vaginal cones alone: 14/15 (93%) versus 14/19 (75%), but this was not statistically significant (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.71). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. Only one trial evaluating PFMT when added to drug therapy provided information about adverse events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.60; very low-quality evidence).With regard to condition-specific quality of life, there were no statistically significant differences between women (with SUI, UUI or MUI) who received PFMT added to bladder training and those who received bladder training alone at three months after treatment either on the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-Revised scale (mean difference (MD) -5.90, 95% CI -35.53 to 23.73) or on the Urogenital Distress Inventory scale (MD -18.90, 95% CI -37.92 to 0.12). A similar pattern of results was observed between women with SUI who received PFMT plus either a continence pessary or duloxetine and those who received the continence pessary or duloxetine alone. In all these comparisons, the quality of the evidence for the reported critical outcomes ranged from moderate to very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review found insufficient evidence to state whether or not there were additional effects of adding PFMT to other active treatment when compared with the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence (SUI, UUI or MUI) in women. These results should be interpreted with caution as most of the comparisons were investigated in small, single trials. None of the trials in this review were large enough to provide reliable evidence. Also, none of the included trials reported data on adverse events associated with the PFMT regimen, thereby making it very difficult to evaluate the safety of PFMT.

Examination of outcome after mild traumatic brain injury: the contribution of injury beliefs and Leventhal's common sense model.

Associations between components of Leventhal's common sense model of health behaviour (injury beliefs, coping, distress) and outcome after mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) were examined. Participants (n = 147) were recruited within three months following MTBI and assessed six months later, completing study questionnaires at both visits (Illness Perceptions Questionnaire Revised, Brief COPE, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Outcome measures included the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire and Rivermead Head Injury Follow-Up Questionnaire. Univariate and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses examined associations between injury beliefs, coping and distress at baseline, and later outcome. Participants endorsing stronger injury identity beliefs (p < .01), expectations of lasting severe consequences (p < .01), and distress (p < .01) at time one, had greater odds of poor outcome at time two. Coping styles were also associated with later outcome although variability in findings limited interpretability. Associations between psychological variables and outcome were examined and 76.5% of cases were correctly classified by the model. Consistent with Leventhal's model, participant beliefs about their injury and recovery had significant associations with outcome over time. Coping also appeared to have important associations with outcome but more research is required to examine these. Current reassurance-based interventions may be improved by targeting variables such as injury beliefs, coping and adjustment soon after injury.

Which anticholinergic drug for overactive bladder symptoms in adults.

BACKGROUND: Around 16% to 45% of adults have overactive bladder symptoms (urgency with frequency and/or urge incontinence - 'overactive bladder syndrome'). Anticholinergic drugs are common treatments. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different anticholinergic drugs for overactive bladder symptoms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 8 March 2011) and reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in adults with overactive bladder symptoms or detrusor overactivity that compared one anticholinergic drug with another, or two doses of the same drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted data. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook. MAIN RESULTS: Eighty six trials, 70 parallel and 16 cross-over designs were included (31,249 adults). Most trials were described as double-blind, but were variable in other aspects of quality. Crossover studies did not present data in a way that could be included in the meta-analyses. Twenty nine collected quality of life data (the primary outcome measure) using validated measures, but only fifteen reported useable data.Tolterodine versus oxybutynin: There were no statistically significant differences for quality of life, patient reported cure or improvement, leakage episodes or voids in 24 hours, but fewer withdrawals due to adverse events with tolterodine (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.66, data from eight trials), and less risk of dry mouth (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.71, data from ten trials).Solifenacin versus tolterodine: There were statistically significant differences for quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.12, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.01, data from three trials), patient reported cure/improvement (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39, data from two trials), leakage episodes in 24 hours (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.30, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.08, data from four studies) and urgency episodes in 24 hours (WMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.13, data from four trials), all favouring solifenacin. There was no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events and dry mouth, but after sensitivity analysis the dry mouth (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.94) was statistically significantly lower with solifenacin when compared to Immediate Release (IR) tolterodine.Fesoterodine versus extended release tolterodine: Three trials contributed to the meta analyses. There were statistically significant differences for quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.14), patient reported cure/improvement (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16), leakage episodes (WMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.09), frequency (WMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.06) and urgency episodes (WMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.16) in 24 hours, all favouring fesoterodine, but those taking fesoterodine had higher risk of withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.98) and higher risk of dry mouth (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.05) at 12 weeks.Different doses of tolterodine: The standard recommended starting dose (2 mg twice daily) was compared with two lower (0.5 mg and 1 mg twice daily), and one higher dose (4 mg twice daily). The effects of 1 mg, 2 mg and 4 mg doses were similar for leakage episodes and micturitions in 24 hours, with greater risk of dry mouth with 2 and 4 mg doses at two to 12 weeks.Different doses of solifenacin: The standard recommended starting dose of 5 mg once daily was compared to 10 mg: while frequency and urgency were less (better) with 10 mg compared to 5 mg, there was a higher risk of dry mouth with 10 mg solifenacin at four to 12 weeks.Different doses of fesoterodine:The recommended starting dose of 4mg once daily was compared to 8 and 12 mg. The clinical efficacy (patient reported cure, leakage episodes, micturition per 24 hours) of 8 mg was better than 4 mg fesoterodine but with a higher risk of dry mouth with 8 mg.There was no statistically significant difference between 4 and 12 mg in the efficacy but the dry mouth was significantly higher with 12 mg at eight to 12 weeks.Extended versus immediate release preparations of oxybutynin and/or tolterodine: There were no statistically significant differences for cure/improvement, leakage episodes or micturitions in 24 hours, or withdrawals due to adverse events, but there were few data. Overall, extended release preparations had less risk of dry mouth at two to 12 weeks.One extended release preparation versus another: There was less risk of dry mouth with oral extended release tolterodine than oxybutynin (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95), but no difference between transdermal oxybutynin and oral extended release tolterodine although some people withdrew due to skin reaction at the transdermal patch site at 12 weeks. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Where the prescribing choice is between oral immediate release oxybutynin or tolterodine, tolterodine might be preferred for reduced risk of dry mouth. With tolterodine, 2 mg twice daily is the usual starting dose, but a 1 mg twice daily dose might be equally effective, with less risk of dry mouth. If extended release preparations of oxybutynin or tolterodine are available, these might be preferred to immediate release preparations because there is less risk of dry mouth.Between solifenacin and immediate release tolterodine, solifenacin might be preferred for better efficacy and less risk of dry mouth. Solifenacin 5 mg once daily is the usual starting dose, this could be increased to 10 mg once daily for better efficacy but with increased risk of dry mouth.Between fesoterodine and extended release tolterodine, fesoterodine might be preferred for superior efficacy but has higher risk of withdrawal due to adverse events and higher risk of dry mouth.There is little or no evidence available about quality of life, costs, or long-term outcome in these studies. There were insufficient data from trials of other anticholinergic drugs to draw any conclusions.

Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women.

BACKGROUND: About a third of women have urinary incontinence and up to a 10th have faecal incontinence after childbirth. Pelvic floor muscle training is commonly recommended during pregnancy and after birth both for prevention and the treatment of incontinence. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of pelvic floor muscle training compared to usual antenatal and postnatal care on incontinence. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which includes searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process and handsearching (searched 7 February 2012) and the references of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials in pregnant or postnatal women. One arm of the trial needed to include pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT). Another arm was either no PFMT or usual antenatal or postnatal care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials were independently assessed for eligibility and methodological quality. Data were extracted then cross checked. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Three different populations of women were considered separately, women dry at randomisation (prevention); women wet at randomisation (treatment); and a mixed population of women who might be one or the other (prevention or treatment). Trials were further divided into those which started during pregnancy (antenatal); and those started after delivery (postnatal). MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two trials involving 8485 women (4231 PFMT, 4254 controls) met the inclusion criteria and contributed to the analysis.Pregnant women without prior urinary incontinence (prevention) who were randomised to intensive antenatal PFMT were less likely than women randomised to no PFMT or usual antenatal care to report urinary incontinence up to six months after delivery (about 30% less; risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95, combined result of 5 trials).Postnatal women with persistent urinary incontinence (treatment) three months after delivery and who received PFMT were less likely than women who did not receive treatment or received usual postnatal care to report urinary incontinence 12 months after delivery (about 40% less; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.03, combined result of 3 trials). It seemed that the more intensive the programme the greater the treatment effect.The results of seven studies showed a statistically significant result favouring PFMT in a mixed population (women with and without incontinence symptoms) in late pregnancy (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.94, random-effects model). Based on the trial data to date, the extent to which mixed prevention and treatment approaches to PFMT in the postnatal period are effective is less clear (that is, offering advice on PFMT to all pregnant or postpartum women whether they have incontinence symptoms or not). It is possible that mixed prevention and treatment approaches might be effective when the intervention is intensive enough.There was little evidence about long-term effects for either urinary or faecal incontinence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that for women having their first baby, PFMT can prevent urinary incontinence up to six months after delivery. There is support for the widespread recommendation that PFMT is an appropriate treatment for women with persistent postpartum urinary incontinence. It is possible that the effects of PFMT might be greater with targeted rather than mixed prevention and treatment approaches and in certain groups of women (for example primiparous women; women who had bladder neck hypermobility in early pregnancy, a large baby, or a forceps delivery). These and other uncertainties, particularly long-term effectiveness, require further testing.

Documented incontinence after stroke: a secondary analysis of a cohort study. Reducing Ethnic and Geographic Inequities to Optimise New Zealand Stroke Care (REGIONS Care).

AIM: To estimate the prevalence of incontinence after stroke in Aotearoa New Zealand overall and by ethnicity, the associations between incontinence and subsequent mortality and living in residential care, and to estimate the health utilities in relation to continence. METHOD: Secondary analysis of data from a prospective (1 May to 31 July 2018) cohort study (REGIONS Care study) of patients with a confirmed stroke admitted to New Zealand hospitals. Logistic and linear regression were used, and multivariate models were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and stroke severity. The association between living in residential care, incontinence, and mobility was also assessed. RESULTS: There were 320/2,377 (13.5%) patients with documented incontinence during hospitalisation after stroke. Incontinence was not associated with ethnicity but was associated with increased mortality/living in residential care, at discharge, three, six and twelve months after stroke. Stroke survivors with independent mobility were more likely to live in residential care if incontinent. Health utility scores were lower at three, six and twelve months for those with incontinence after stroke. CONCLUSION: This study likely underestimated incontinence prevalence after stroke, although incontinence was associated with increased mortality and probability of living in residential care.

Comparisons of approaches to pelvic floor muscle training for urinary incontinence in women.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor muscle training is the most commonly recommended physical therapy treatment for women with stress urinary incontinence. It is also sometimes recommended for mixed and, less commonly, urge urinary incontinence. The supervision and content of pelvic floor muscle training programmes are highly variable, and some programmes use additional strategies in an effort to increase adherence or training effects. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different approaches to pelvic floor muscle training for women with urinary incontinence. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and CINAHL, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 17 May 2011), and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials or quasi-randomised trials in women with stress, urge or mixed urinary incontinence (based on symptoms, signs or urodynamics). One arm of the study included pelvic floor muscle training. Another arm was an alternative approach to pelvic floor muscle training, such as a different way of teaching, supervising or performing pelvic floor muscle training. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality. We extracted then cross-checked data. We resolved disagreements by discussion. We processed data as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (version 5.2.2). We subgrouped trials by intervention. MAIN RESULTS: We screened 574 records for eligibility and included 21 trials in the review. The 21 trials randomised 1490 women and addressed 11 comparisons. These were: differences in training supervision (amount, individual versus group), in approach (one versus another, the effect of an additional component) and the exercise training (type of contraction, frequency of training). In women with stress urinary incontinence, 10% of those who received weekly or twice-weekly group supervision in addition to individual appointments with the therapist did not report improvement post-treatment compared to 43% of the group who had individual appointments only (risk ratio (RR) for no improvement 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.55, four trials). Looking at this another way, 90% of those who had combined group and individual supervision reported improvement versus 57% of women receiving individual supervision only. While women receiving the combination of frequent group supervision and individual supervision of pelvic floor muscle training were more likely to report improvement, the confidence interval was wide, and more than half of the 'control' group (the women who did not get the additional weekly or twice-weekly group supervision) reported improvement. This finding, of subjective improvement in both active treatment groups, with more improvement reported by those receiving more health professional contact, was consistent throughout the review.We feel there are several reasons why caution is needed when interpreting the results of the review: there were few data in any comparison; a number of trials were confounded by comparing two arms with multiple differences in the approaches to pelvic floor muscle training; there was a likelihood of a relationship between attention and reporting of more improvement in women who were not blind to treatment allocation; some trials chose interventions that were unlikely to have a muscle training effect; and some trials did not adequately describe their intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found that the existing evidence was insufficient to make any strong recommendations about the best approach to pelvic floor muscle training. We suggest that women are offered reasonably frequent appointments during the training period, because the few data consistently showed that women receiving regular (e.g. weekly) supervision were more likely to report improvement than women doing pelvic floor muscle training with little or no supervision.