Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Electrical stimulation with non-implanted electrodes for urinary incontinence in men

  1. Bary Berghmans1,*,
  2. Erik Hendriks2,
  3. Arnold Bernards3,
  4. Rob de Bie2,
  5. Muhammad Imran Omar4

Editorial Group: Cochrane Incontinence Group

Published Online: 6 JUN 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 21 JAN 2012

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001202.pub5


How to Cite

Berghmans B, Hendriks E, Bernards A, de Bie R, Omar MI. Electrical stimulation with non-implanted electrodes for urinary incontinence in men. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD001202. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001202.pub5.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Maastricht University Medical Centre, Pelvic care Center Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands

  2. 2

    Maastricht University, Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht, Netherlands

  3. 3

    Dutch Institute of Allied Health Care (Nederland Paramedisch Instituut: NPi), Research & Innovation, Amersfoort, Utrecht, Netherlands

  4. 4

    University of Aberdeen, Academic Urology Unit, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK

*Bary Berghmans, Pelvic care Center Maastricht, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO Box 5800, Maastricht, 6202 az, Netherlands. bary.berghmans@maastrichtuniversity.nl.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New
  2. Published Online: 6 JUN 2013

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. PRISMA study flow diagram.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
[Figure 3]
Figure 3. Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 ES with non-implanted devices versus no active treatment, Outcome 1 Number of men with urinary incontinence.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 ES with non-implanted devices versus no active treatment, Outcome 2 24-hr pad test (grams of urine lost).
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 ES with non-implanted devices versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of men with urinary incontinence.
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 ES with non-implanted devices versus placebo, Outcome 2 24-hr Pad test (grams loss of urine).
[Analysis 2.3]
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 ES with non-implanted devices versus placebo, Outcome 3 Urinary incontinence score (Short Form International Consultation of Incontinence Score.
[Analysis 2.4]
Analysis 2.4. Comparison 2 ES with non-implanted devices versus placebo, Outcome 4 Quality of life score: International Consultation of Incontinence Questionnaire.
[Analysis 2.5]
Analysis 2.5. Comparison 2 ES with non-implanted devices versus placebo, Outcome 5 Adverse events.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 1 Number of men with urinary incontinence (subjective): at 3 months.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 2 Number of men with urinary incontinence (subjective): at 6 months.
[Analysis 4.3]
Analysis 4.3. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 3 Number of men with urinary incontinence (subjective): at 12 months.
[Analysis 4.4]
Analysis 4.4. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 4 Quality of life (EORTC QLQ 30).
[Analysis 4.5]
Analysis 4.5. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 5 Number of men with urinary incontinence (objective): anal ES.
[Analysis 4.6]
Analysis 4.6. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 6 Mean number of pads/day (from voiding diary).
[Analysis 4.7]
Analysis 4.7. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 7 24-hr pad test (grams of urine lost).
[Analysis 4.8]
Analysis 4.8. Comparison 4 ES with non-implanted devices combined with other therapy versus other therapy without ES, Outcome 8 Adverse effects.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 One type of ES with non-implanted devices versus other ES, Outcome 1 Patient perceived recovery (dichotomous scales).
[Analysis 5.2]
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 One type of ES with non-implanted devices versus other ES, Outcome 2 1-hr PAD test (grams loss of urine).
[Analysis 5.3]
Analysis 5.3. Comparison 5 One type of ES with non-implanted devices versus other ES, Outcome 3 Quality of life (EORTC QLQ 30).