Cochrane · systematic review · CD010551
Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women
Ayeleke, RO, Hay‐Smith, EJC, Omar, MI · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
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
63
current version
GRADE rated
11
No studies
52
Included studies
NR
No studies 52 · 82.5%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 7 · 11.1%Low 1 · 1.6%Moderate 3 · 4.8%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
Current version onlyPFMT added to vaginal cones versus vaginal cones alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (pad test) PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | RR 1.27 [0.94, 1.71] | 1 study · 34 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to lifestyle intervention versus lifestyle intervention alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to bladder training versus bladder training alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured ‐ 3 months after treatment PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | RR 1.71 [0.84, 3.46] | 1 study · 122 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ 3 months after treatment Incontinence Impact Questionnaire‐ Revised (IIQ‐R) PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 118 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | RR 0.95 [0.57, 1.57] | 1 study · 96 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
PFMT added to electrical stimulation versus electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | RR 2.06 [0.79, 5.38] | 2 studies · 56 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to magnetic stimulation versus magnetic stimulation alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to continence pessary versus continence pessary alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) at 12 months PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | RR 0.88 [0.67, 1.16] | 1 study · 207 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life at 12 months Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI) PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | RR 0.81 [0.62, 1.08] | 1 study · 207 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to drug therapy versus drug therapy alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured ‐ PFMT + clenbuterol versus clenbuterol PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | RR 1.16 [0.83, 1.63] | 1 study · 32 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | RR 0.84 [1.6, 45] | 1 study · 162 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Condition‐specific quality of life on I‐QoL Questionnaire ‐ PFMT + duloxetine versus duloxetine Incontinence Quality of Life questionnaire PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 101 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT prior to surgical intervention versus surgical intervention alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to HSGS versus HSGS alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | RR 2.38 [1.19, 4.73] | 1 study · 74 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to vaginal cones versus vaginal cones alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (pad test) PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | RR 1.27 [0.94, 1.71] | 1 study · 34 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to vaginal cones vs vaginal cones alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to lifestyle intervention versus lifestyle intervention alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to lifestyle intervention vs lifestyle intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to bladder training versus bladder training alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured ‐ 3 months after treatment PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | RR 1.71 [0.84, 3.46] | 1 study · 122 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life ‐ 3 months after treatment Incontinence Impact Questionnaire‐ Revised (IIQ‐R) PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 118 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) PFMT added to bladder training vs bladder training alone | RR 0.95 [0.57, 1.57] | 1 study · 96 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
PFMT added to electrical stimulation versus electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | RR 3 [0.37, 24.58] | 1 study · 22 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to electrical stimulation vs electrical stimulation alone (excluding implanted electrodes) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to magnetic stimulation versus magnetic stimulation alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to magnetic stimulation vs magnetic stimulation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to continence pessary versus continence pessary alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) at 12 months PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | RR 0.88 [0.67, 1.16] | 1 study · 207 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life at 12 months Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI) PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | RR 0.81 [0.62, 1.08] | 1 study · 207 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to continence pessary vs continence pessary alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to drug therapy versus drug therapy alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured ‐ PFMT + clenbuterol versus clenbuterol PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | RR 1.16 [0.83, 1.63] | 1 study · 32 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | RR 0.84 [1.6, 45] | 1 study · 162 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Condition‐specific quality of life on I‐QoL Questionnaire ‐ PFMT + duloxetine versus duloxetine Incontinence Quality of Life questionnaire PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 101 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to drug therapy vs drug therapy alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT prior to surgical intervention versus surgical intervention alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured or improved (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women reporting adverse events ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT prior to surgical intervention vs surgical intervention alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
PFMT added to HSGS versus HSGS alone for urinary incontinence in women
Population: patients with urinary incontinence in women
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of women cured PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | RR 2.38 [1.19, 4.73] | 1 study · 74 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number of women reporting incontinence at 1 year or more after treatment (subjective) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Objective measure of urine leakage (e.g. pad test) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women experiencing pain ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Condition‐specific quality of life assessed by patient questionnaire such as Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
General health status evaluation e.g. Short Form (SF)‐36 ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring further treatment such as surgery, drugs, mechanical devices (relapse) ‐ not reported PFMT added to HSGS vs HSGS alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |