ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2017
Real world treatment patterns in the neurogenic bladder population: a systematic literature review.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Real Daily Need for Incontinence Aids and Appliances in Patients with Neurogenic Bladder Dysfunction in a Community Setting in Germany.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2020Article
- Management strategies for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) among people with multiple sclerosis (MS): a qualitative study of the perspectives of people with MS and healthcare professionals.HRB open research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myriad treatment modalities are available for neurogenic bladder (NGB) including behavioral therapies, oral pharmacotherapy, catheterization and surgical procedures. Little is known about how NGB patients are managed in the real world, how well patterns relate to clinical guidelines and how strategies may have changed over time. To address this gap, a systematic review (SR) was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE [1996-2017]. The inclusion criteria for studies were: (I) published in English; (II) conducted in human subjects; (III) reporting the treatment patterns/use in NGB; (IV) conducted in a real world setting. A narrative synthesis of results was conducted, comparing the results to current treatment guidelines. Percentage of treatment use was summarized using ranges. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Although most studies focused on spinal cord injuries (SCI), study designs and settings were heterogeneous. All data was collected before 2007. The most popular form of oral pharmacotherapy was antimuscarinics, used by 12.6-86.7% of patients; 0-100% of patients used catheterization techniques, 2.5-53.1% used reflex voiding (RV), and 0.2-55% underwent surgery. A notable amount of patients switched treatments. This SR revealed that numerous strategies have been used to manage NGB throughout the years and there has been a large variance in their use. Whilst there were some discrepancies, most practices matched recommendations made in current guidelines. Ultimately, this SR showed that there is a large gap of epidemiological studies conducted in the field of NGB and the authors felt that available data was insufficient to build a comprehensive picture of treatment patterns. Epidemiological studies using electronic medical records (EMRs) are necessary to advance our understanding of how treatment patterns have changed, and also build a comprehensive picture of how patients are managed in current practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.