Get access

Absorbent products for light urinary incontinence in women

  • Review
  • Intervention


  • Mandy Fader,

    Corresponding author
    1. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Continence and Skin Health Technology Group, Highfield, Southampton, UK
    • Mandy Fader, Continence and Skin Health Technology Group, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Southampton, University Road, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Alan M Cottenden,

    1. Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, Continence and Skin Health Technology Group, London, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kathryn Getliffe

    1. University of Southampton, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Southampton, UK
    Search for more papers by this author



Incontinence is a common and embarrassing problem which has a profound effect on social and psychological well-being. Many people wear absorbent products to contain urine leakage and protect their clothes. It can be difficult to define light urinary incontinence because urine volumes, flow and frequency rates may vary substantially whilst still being considered 'light'. Light incontinence may encompass occasional (monthly) leaks of very small amounts (e.g. 1 g to 2 g) up to frequent leaks (several times per day) of larger amounts (e.g. 20 g to 50 g). A practical definition is urine loss that can be contained within a small absorbent pad (typically 50 g to 500 g; ISO 1996).


To assess the effectiveness of different types of absorbent product designs for women with light urinary incontinence.

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 2 April 2009) and the reference lists of relevant articles were perused.

Selection criteria

Types of studies
All randomised or quasi-randomised trials of absorbent products for women with light urinary incontinence.

Types of participants
Women with light urinary incontinence.

Types of intervention
Absorbent products (disposable insert pads, menstrual pads, washable pants with integral pad, washable insert pads) suitable for light incontinence.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible studies and independently extracted data from the included trial.

Main results

One study with 85 participants met the selection criteria. This trial studied all the absorbent product designs included in this review. Data were presented on all included outcomes. For preventing leakage, for preference and for overall acceptability disposable insert pads are better than disposable menstrual pads which are better than washable pants with integral pad which are better than washable insert pads. There is no strong evidence that either disposables or washables are better for skin health. The disposable insert is the most expensive design and there is no dominant design for cost-effectiveness. There is evidence that some women will prefer alternative designs which are all cheaper than disposable inserts.

Authors' conclusions

Although data were available from only one eligible trial the data were sufficiently robust to make recommendations for practice. Disposable insert pads are typically more effective than the other designs considered. However, because they are the most expensive, providing choice of designs (or combinations of designs for different circumstances) is likely to be cost-effective.




尿失禁是一個常見且令人尷尬的問題,對於患者的社會和心理健康也造成很大的影響. 許多病人會穿戴可吸收漏尿的產品以防衣物髒污. 我們通常很難對輕度尿失禁下一個準確的定義,因為尿量,流速,排尿頻率在不同的病人身上可能有很大的不同,但仍然被視為“輕度”. 這也就是說,輕度尿失禁可能包含偶爾(以月為單位)的少量(1∼2克)到時常(一天好幾次)的大量漏尿(20∼50克). 一個比較實際的定義是:漏尿可被吸收在一片小型的護墊中(約50∼500克;ISO 1996),即稱之為輕度尿失禁




我們搜尋和仔細閱讀研究Cochrane 專攻尿失禁族群的登記試驗(Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register) (2006年5月3號) 和相關主題的參考文獻


研究類型:以全隨機或半隨機的方式試驗各種適用於輕度尿失禁婦女的可吸收性產品. 參與者類型:輕度尿失禁婦女介入方式:適合輕度尿失禁的可吸收產品(包括拋棄式嵌入護墊,衛生棉,可清洗的襯褲與護墊,可清洗的嵌入性護墊)




其中一個研究有85個參與者符合選擇標準,且包含所有此篇回顧文章提到的可吸收產品類型,所有的結果都有數據呈現. 對於避免漏尿,病患喜好,和整體的接受度而言,拋棄式嵌入護墊優於衛生棉,衛生棉優於可清洗的襯褲與護墊,可清洗的襯褲與護墊優於可清洗的嵌入性護墊. 沒有強烈的證據顯示拋棄式或清洗式哪ㄧ種對皮膚健康較好. 拋棄式嵌入護墊是最貴的設計,且沒有任何ㄧ種設計是顯著符合經濟效益的. 有證據顯示某些婦女會選擇比拋棄式嵌入護墊便宜的其他產品


雖然所有的數據都是來自唯一一個合適的研究,但其實已經足夠作為臨床建議的指標. 拋棄式嵌入護墊顯然比其他設計更有效. 然而,因為它們的價錢比較高,一些其他的設計(或在不同的場合使用不同的產品)是比較符合經濟效益的



此翻譯計畫由臺灣國家衛生研究院(National Health Research Institutes, Taiwan)統籌


供輕度尿失禁婦女使用的可吸收性產品. 膀胱控制不良對婦女來說是常見的問題,許多病人會使用可吸收漏尿的護墊以防衣物髒污. 目前共有四種不同設計的吸收性產品可供輕度尿失禁婦女使用(換句話說就是可將漏尿吸收的小型護墊):拋棄式嵌入護墊,衛生棉,可清洗的襯褲與護墊,可清洗的嵌入性護墊. 這篇回顧性文章只找到一篇合適的臨床試驗,它在過去的十年中進行比較幾種不同設計產品的優劣. 這個試驗包含了所有上述提到的設計. 有證據顯示對於避免漏尿,病患喜好,和整體的接受度而言,拋棄式嵌入護墊優於衛生棉,衛生棉優於可清洗的襯褲與護墊,可清洗的襯褲與護墊優於可清洗的嵌入性護墊. 沒有強烈的證據顯示拋棄式或清洗式哪ㄧ種對皮膚健康較好. 大多數婦女喜歡使用拋棄式嵌入護墊,但某些婦女喜歡其他較便宜的產品,或者覺得便宜的產品適用於某些情況. 建議婦女選擇自己喜歡的吸收性產品(或在不同的場合使用不同的產品)比較符合經濟效益,而且也比單純只提供拋棄式嵌入護墊更能滿足病患的需求








Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register(2009年4月2日検索)を検索し、関連性のある論文の参考文献リストをスキャンした。










監  訳: 内藤 徹,2009.11.16

実施組織: 厚生労働省委託事業によりMindsが実施した。

ご注意 : この日本語訳は、臨床医、疫学研究者などによる翻訳のチェックを受けて公開していますが、訳語の間違いなどお気づきの点がございましたら、Minds事務局までご連絡ください。Mindsでは最新版の日本語訳を掲載するよう努めておりますが、編集作業に伴うタイム・ラグが生じている場合もあります。ご利用に際しては、最新版(英語版)の内容をご確認ください。

Plain language summary

Absorbent products for light urinary incontinence in women

Bladder control problems are common in women and many wear absorbent pads to contain urine leakage and protect their clothes. There are four main designs of absorbent products used for light urinary incontinence (i.e. urine loss that can contained within a small absorbent pad): disposable insert pads, disposable menstrual pads, washable pants with an integral pad and washable inserts. This review found only one eligible clinical trial which compared different designs of these products and had been carried out in the last ten years. This trial included all the designs. There is evidence that for leakage prevention, overall acceptability and preference, disposable inserts are better than menstrual pads, which are better than washable pants with integral pad, which are better than washable inserts. There is no clear benefit for skin health using either washable or disposable designs. Most women preferred the disposable insert pad but some preferred the other cheaper designs or would find them acceptable in some situations. Allowing women to choose their preferred design of absorbent product (or combination of different designs for different circumstances) would be more cost-effective and provide better patient satisfaction than provision of disposable insert pads alone.