ReviewNeurourology and urodynamics2021
Do we need more patient-friendly treatment options for overactive bladder (OAB)?
Review in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy differences between SNM and various peripheral nerve electrical stimulation modalities for NLUTD: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Chemodenervation Use for Overactive Bladder in Female Medicare Beneficiaries.Urogynecology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Evolving types of pudendal neuromodulation for lower urinary tract dysfunction.Central European journal of urology · 2024Review
- Neurobiological insights into lower urinary tract dysfunction: evaluating the role of brain-derived neurotrophic factor.American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2023Review
- Do we need more patient-friendly treatment options for overactive bladder (OAB)?Neurourology and urodynamics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo collect feedback from subjects diagnosed with overactive bladder (OAB) on its impact on their quality of life, their satisfaction with current treatment options, and to assess nonsurgical, tibial nerve stimulation as a treatment option.
methodsSubjects were asked a variety of questions about the impact of OAB on their lives, their satisfaction with current and previous treatment approaches. Subjects evaluated the comfort of a nonworking prototype garment and were given electrical stimulation over their posterior tibial nerve to assess comfort and tolerability. Electromyographic (EMG) signals were recorded.
resultsA total of 40 subjects with OAB symptoms were evaluated in the study. Urgency (55%), frequency (47.5%), nocturia (40%), and incontinence (30%) were the most bothersome symptoms. At the time of the study only 32.5% of the subjects were treating their OAB symptoms. Of those that had tried and discontinued treatments, most had failed medications (n = 14) due to no improvements or side effects. Only 2 subjects found stimulation to be uncomfortable before an EMG signal could be detected. The most common word used to describe the feeling of stimulation was "constant," followed by "tingling," "vibrating," and "comfortable."
conclusionsMost subjects who had tried OAB treatments were dissatisfied and discontinued their use. A new patient-friendly approach to OAB therapy that delivers efficacy but overcomes drawbacks associated with currently available treatments is needed. Subjects found electrical stimulation over the tibial nerve to be comfortable and tolerable and this should be considered as an alternative treatment approach for OAB.
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.