Combined conservative interventions for urge, stress or mixed incontinence in adults

  • French B
  • Thomas L
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This artice is free to access.

Abstract

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:To determine whether combinations of conservative interventions for urge, stress, or mixed urinary incontinence reduce the number of people with urinary incontinence compared against no treatment/usual care, or another intervention.  The secondary objectives are to determine the effect of combined conservative interventions on subjective perceptions of cure or improvement; the severity of incontinence or urinary symptoms; quality of life or symptom distress; satisfaction with treatment; cost; or adverse events.The specific comparisons to be made include: combined conservative intervention versus no active treatment (e.g. no treatment, wait list control, attention control or usual care); combined conservative intervention versus another single active treatment (e.g. a single conservative intervention, or an active non-conservative intervention); one combined conservative intervention versus another combined active conservative treatment.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

French, B., Thomas, L. H., Leathley, M. J., Sutton, C. J., Booth, J., … Watkins, C. L. (2010). Combined conservative interventions for urge, stress or mixed incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd008910

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free