Cochrane · systematic review · CD003505
Lifestyle interventions for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Imamura, M, Williams, K, Wells, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
IncontinenceAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
35
current version
GRADE rated
11
No studies
23
Included studies
NR
No studies 23 · 65.7%Ungraded 1 · 2.9%Very low 7 · 20%Low 4 · 11.4%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Weight loss compared to control for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Population: adults with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cure rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Weight loss vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by patient observation (all UI types) Weight loss vs control | RR 1.4 [1.14, 1.71] | 1 study · 304 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Condition‐specific quality of life Incontinence Impact Questionnaire. Scale from: 0 to 400. Better quality of life indicated by lower values. Weight loss vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Adverse effects Weight loss vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 48 participants | Ungraded |
Cure rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) Weight loss vs control | RR 1.11 [0.91, 1.37] | 1 study · 738 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Improvement rates by symptom quantification (all UI type) Weight loss vs control | RR 1.21 [1.02, 1.44] | 2 studies · 1032 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Prevalence of weekly UI (all UI type) Weight loss vs control | RR 0.88 [0.78, 1] | 1 study · 2739 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Soy‐rich diet compared to control for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Population: adults with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cure rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cure rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Incontinent episodes per week (all UI types) ‐ not reported Soy‐rich diet vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Decreasing fluids compared to increasing fluids for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Population: adults with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cure rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 69 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse effects Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 93 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Cure rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Incontinent episodes per week (all UI types) Decreasing fluids vs increasing fluids | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 125 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Caffeine reduction compared to control for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Population: adults with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cure rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ICIQ Overactive Bladder Symptoms Quality of Life. Scale from: 25 to 160. Better quality of life indicated by lower values. Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 11 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse effects ‐ not reported Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cure rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Incontinent episodes per day (all UI types) Caffeine reduction vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 74 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Lifestyle weight loss compared to metformin weight loss for the treatment of urinary incontinence in adults
Population: adults with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cure rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by patient observation (all UI types) ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cure rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Improvement rates by symptom quantification (all UI types) ‐ not reported Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Prevalence of weekly UI (all UI types) Lifestyle weight loss vs metformin weight loss | RR 0.79 [0.7, 0.9] | 1 study · 1294 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |