What do systematic reviews say?

Electrical stimulation vs drug therapy

It is very uncertain whether electrical stimulation changes adverse effects ‐ ES versus solifenacin succinate compared with drug therapy (very low certainty).

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.09 [0.01, 1.6]
  1 study · 100 participants
  Very low

PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT)

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT)

Electrical stimulation plus pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) may leads to higher participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence compared with PFMT alone (low certainty).

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.82 [1.44, 5.52]
  1 study · 51 participants
  Low

PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT)

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 51 participants
  Very low

PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT)

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 201 participants
  Low

PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT)

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus behavioural therapy vs behavioural therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus behavioural therapy vs behavioural therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus behavioural therapy vs behavioural therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 82 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation plus behavioural therapy vs behavioural therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus drug therapy vs drug therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus drug therapy vs drug therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation plus drug therapy vs drug therapy alone

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 248 participants
  Low

Electrical stimulation plus drug therapy vs drug therapy alone

It is very uncertain whether electrical stimulation plus drug therapy changes adverse effects compared with drug therapy alone (very low certainty).

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.45 [0.04, 4.55]
  1 study · 38 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES twice a week

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 37 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES twice a week

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES three times a week

It is very uncertain whether electrical stimulation (ES) once a week changes participants cured or improved ( compared with ES three times a week (very low certainty).

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.97 [0.6, 1.57]
  1 study · 35 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES three times a week

It is very uncertain whether electrical stimulation (ES) once a week changes participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence ( compared with ES three times a week (very low certainty).

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.8 [0.29, 2.21]
  1 study · 22 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES three times a week

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 35 participants
  Very low

Electrical stimulation (ES) once a week vs ES three times a week

• Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 35 participants
  Very low