Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29675556›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2018

Patients' perspectives on urethral bulk injection therapy and mid-urethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence.

Fenne M Casteleijn, Sandra E Zwolsman, Claudia R Kowalik, Jan-Paul P W R Roovers

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fenne M CasteleijnDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.m.casteleijn@amc.uva.nl.
Sandra E ZwolsmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Claudia R KowalikDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan-Paul P W R RooversDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Academic Medical Center · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisThe aim of this study was to identify all treatment decision factors that determined the preference for peri-urethral bulk injection therapy (PBI) or mid-urethral sling (MUS) surgery in patients with primary stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Second, we explored what patients expect from treatment for SUI and whether patients would consider PBI as a primary treatment option.

methodsIn a qualitative design, 20 semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted in women with primary SUI. Exclusion criteria were: previous PBI or MUS surgery; predominating urgency. Interviews were guided by three open-ended questions and a topic list. PBI treatment and MUS surgery were described in detail, and the efficacy was stated as 70% and 90%, respectively. Data saturation was reached when no new treatment decision factors were identified in three consecutive interviews. Interviews were audiotaped and fully transcribed. Thematic analysis by a coding process was done independently by two researchers.

resultsSixteen procedural, personal, professional, social and external treatment decision factors were identified. Regarding expectations about treatment for SUI, women believed 'becoming dry' was wishful thinking. The majority of patients accepted a small degree of persistent urinary incontinence after treatment. Regardless of their treatment preference, patients indicated that women should be informed about PBI as a primary treatment option.

conclusionPatients with primary SUI are open to PBI as an alternative treatment option even with lower cure rates compared with MUS surgery performed under general or spinal anesthesia. Patients indicated that women with primary SUI seeking treatment should be informed about PBI as a treatment option.

Indexed as

Suburethral SlingsFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansInterviews as TopicMaleNetherlandsQualitative ResearchTreatment OutcomeUrethraUrinary Incontinence, StressMid-urethral sling surgeryStress urinary incontinenceTreatment preferenceUrethral injection therapy

Identifiers

PMID29675556
PMCPMC6132683
OpenAlexW2800991546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.