Trial reportNeurourology and urodynamics2026
Low-Frequency Stimulation Provides Significant Added Benefit for Postpartum Urinary Incontinence: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Trial report in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of low-frequency electrical stimulation (LES) in treating UI among postpartum women.
methodsPostpartum women diagnosed with UI who received treatment at two tertiary hospitals between 1st January and 30th June 2020 were included. Patients received one of two regiments: (1) 10 sessions of functional electrical stimulation (FES) at 30-40 Hz combined with biofeedback (FES-BF group); (2) 4 sessions of LES (2-10 Hz) followed by 6 sessions of FES combined with biofeedback (LES-BF group). The primary outcome was the improvement in urine leakage frequency according to a 7-day bladder diary. The secondary outcomes included cure, severity of UI, quality of life, pelvic floor muscle strength, surface electromyography levels, pain intensity, and pelvic organ prolapse quantification. Multivariate logistic regression and double robust analysis were conducted.
resultsA total of 217 women were involved (LES-BF vs. FES-BF: 102 vs. 115). The LES-BF group demonstrated a significantly higher cure rate in urinary leakage frequency compared to the FES-BF group (36 [35.3%] vs. 25 [21.7%], χ² = 4.915, p = 0.027, OR = 2.85 [95% CI: 1.32 to 6.17]), which confirmed by doubly robust analysis (OR = 3.46, 95% CI: 1.66 to 7.19). We also found superior pelvic muscles strength recovery in the LES-BF group compared to FES-BF group (p < 0.05).
conclusionsThe combination of LES and FES was associated with a significant short-term cure in postpartum UI over FES alone. This protocol could be a candidate treatment option for UI, justifying further validation in randomized controlled trials. CLINICAL
trial registrationThis study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR19000 21717).
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.