Electrical stimulation compared with tolterodine for treatment of urge/urge incontinence amongst women--a randomized controlled trial

Franzén, K.; Johansson, J.-E.; Lauridsen, I.; Canelid, J.; Heiwall, B.; Nilsson, K.

International Urogynecology Journal 21(12): 1517-1524

2010


ISSN/ISBN: 1433-3023
PMID: 20585755
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-010-1213-2
Accession: 052917594

Download citation:  
Text
  |  
BibTeX
  |  
RIS

Article/Abstract emailed within 0-6 h
Payments are secure & encrypted
Powered by Stripe
Powered by PayPal

Abstract
Few randomized controlled trials have compared electrical stimulation treatment with drug therapy. Our hypothesis was that electrical stimulation treatment in women with urgency/urge incontinence would be more efficient compared to drug treatment. Women ≥18 years of age with urgency/urge incontinence were randomized to receive either ten electrical stimulation treatments vaginally and transanally over a period of 5-7 weeks or tolterodine 4 mg orally once daily. Sixty-one women completed the study. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in micturition rate from baseline to 6 months, mean difference, -0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI), -1.61 to 0.82), but a clearly significant difference within each group for electrical stimulation, -2.8 (95% CI, -3.7 to -1.9), and for tolterodine, -3.2 (95% CI, -4.1 to -2.4). Both treatments reduced the number of micturitions, but electrical stimulation was not found to be superior to tolterodine.

Electrical stimulation compared with tolterodine for treatment of urge/urge incontinence amongst women--a randomized controlled trial