Combined conservative interventions for urge, stress or mixed incontinence in adults
Editorial Group: Cochrane Incontinence Group
Published Online: 8 DEC 2010
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
How to Cite
French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, Booth J, Brittain K, Burton C, Cheater F, Roe B, Hay-Smith EJC, McAdam J, ICONS Patient, Carer and Public Involvement Group, Watkins CL. Combined conservative interventions for urge, stress or mixed incontinence in adults (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD008910. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008910.
- Publication Status: New
- Published Online: 8 DEC 2010
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.