Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Purpose: Since patients, physiotherapists and gynaecologists continue to seek effective conservative treatments for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the therapeutic efficacy of intravaginal electrical stimulation (ES) in women with SUI.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, EBSCOHost and Ovid for randomized controlled trials. For dichotomous data, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed with I statistics.
Results: Of the 686 records identified, a total of 10 articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis revealed significant differences between the ES and no active treatment groups in the pooled objective cure rates (RR: 4.20; 95% CI: 1.70 to 10.40; p = 0.001; I = 0%) and subjective cure or improvement rates (RR: 4.96; 95%: 1.01 to 24.37; p = 0.04; I = 0%). No significant differences were found in the pooled number of incontinence episodes per 24 h (MD: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.37; p = 0.56; I = 0%), the pooled Incontinence Quality of Life Questionnaire scores (MD: 1.84; 95% CI: 2.11 to 5.80; p = 0.36; I = 0%) or the pooled number of adverse effects (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.27; p = 0.23; I = 0%) between the ES and other conservative treatment groups.
Conclusion: There was insufficient evidence for or against the use of intravaginal ES therapy for women with SUI, partly due to the variability in the interventions of the included trials and the small number of trials included.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2022.101624 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!