Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31843002›Full record

ArticleTrials2019

ELECtric Tibial nerve stimulation to Reduce Incontinence in Care homes: protocol for the ELECTRIC randomised trial.

J Booth, L Aucott, S Cotton, C Goodman, S Hagen, D Harari, M Lawrence, A Lowndes, L Macaulay, G MacLennan and 8 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03248362 (ELECtric Tibial Nerve Stimulation to Reduce Incontinence in Care Homes), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

NCT03248362 naunknown statusnot on this map

ELECtric Tibial Nerve Stimulation to Reduce Incontinence in Care Homes: ELECTRIC

TypeinterventionalSponsorGlasgow Caledonian UniversityRan2018 to 2020Enrolled408ConditionsUrinary IncontinenceArmsTranscutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation, Sham stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

J BoothSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Govan Mbeki Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK. J.Booth@gcu.ac.uk.
L AucottCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials (CHaRT), University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
S CottonCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials (CHaRT), University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
C GoodmanCentre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
S HagenNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit (NMAHP RU), Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
D HarariGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
M LawrenceSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Govan Mbeki Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.
A LowndesPlaylist for Life, Unit 1/14, Govanhill Workspace, Glasgow,, UK.
L MacaulaySchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Govan Mbeki Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2906-8757
G MacLennanHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
H MasonYunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
D McClurgNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit (NMAHP RU), Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
J NorrieUsher Institute, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK.
C NortonKing's College London, London, UK.
C O'DolanSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Govan Mbeki Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.
D A SkeltonSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Govan Mbeki Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.
C SurrSchool of Health and Community Studies, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
S TreweekCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials (CHaRT), University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Glasgow Caledonian University · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBGlasgow Life · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBKing's College London · GBLeeds Beckett University · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1Department of Health 08/1809/231Department of Health 11/1021/02Department of Health 15/130/73Department of Health HTA/13/75/01Department of Health HTA/15/130/73Department of Health PB-PG-0906-11387Health Technology Assessment Programme HTA 15/130/73
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary incontinence (UI) is highly prevalent in nursing and residential care homes (CHs) and profoundly impacts on residents' dignity and quality of life. CHs predominantly use absorbent pads to contain UI rather than actively treat the condition. Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (TPTNS) is a non-invasive, safe and low-cost intervention with demonstrated effectiveness for reducing UI in adults. However, the effectiveness of TPTNS to treat UI in older adults living in CHs is not known. The ELECTRIC trial aims to establish if a programme of TPTNS is a clinically effective treatment for UI in CH residents and investigate the associated costs and consequences.

methodsThis is a pragmatic, multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised parallel-group trial comparing the effectiveness of TPTNS (target n = 250) with sham stimulation (target n = 250) in reducing volume of UI in CH residents. CH residents (men and women) with self- or staff-reported UI of more than once per week are eligible to take part, including those with cognitive impairment. Outcomes will be measured at 6, 12 and 18 weeks post randomisation using the following measures: 24-h Pad Weight Tests, post void residual urine (bladder scans), Patient Perception of Bladder Condition, Minnesota Toileting Skills Questionnaire and Dementia Quality of Life. Economic evaluation based on a bespoke Resource Use Questionnaire will assess the costs of providing a programme of TPTNS. A concurrent process evaluation will investigate fidelity to the intervention and influencing factors, and qualitative interviews will explore the experiences of TPTNS from the perspective of CH residents, family members, CH staff and managers. DISCUSSION: TPTNS is a non-invasive intervention that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing UI in adults. The ELECTRIC trial will involve CH staff delivering TPTNS to residents and establish whether TPTNS is more effective than sham stimulation for reducing the volume of UI in CH residents. Should TPTNS be shown to be an effective and acceptable treatment for UI in older adults in CHs, it will provide a safe, low-cost and dignified alternative to the current standard approach of containment and medication.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248362. Registered on 14 August 2017. ISRCTN, ISRCTN98415244. Registered on 25 April 2018. https://www.isrctn.com/.

Indexed as

Homes for the AgedNursing HomesTibial NerveTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited KingdomUrinary IncontinenceUrodynamicsCare homesNursing homeOlder adultsTibial nerve stimulationUrinary incontinence

Identifiers

PMID31843002
PMCPMC6915984
OpenAlexW2992420290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.