Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42048080›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2026

Controlling Fecal Incontinence With a Novel Anal Device: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Sadé L Assmann, Bjorn Winkens, Andrea Bours, Brigitte Essers, Tze Lam, Zlatan Mujagic, Stéphanie O Breukink, Daniel Keszthelyi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04657588 (Controlling Faecal Incontinence With a Novel Anal Device), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04657588 nacompletednot on this map

Controlling Faecal Incontinence With a Novel Anal Device: a Cost-effectiveness Trial (CONFIDEnCE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorMaastricht University Medical CenterRan2021 to 2024Enrolled73ConditionsFaecal IncontinenceArmsNavina anal insert, Care as usual
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Sadé L AssmannDepartment of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Bjorn WinkensCare and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, the Netherlands.
Andrea BoursDepartment of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Brigitte EssersCare and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, the Netherlands.
Tze LamDepartment of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
Zlatan MujagicDepartment of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Stéphanie O BreukinkDepartment of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Daniel KeszthelyiDepartment of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Fecal incontinence (FI) affects up to 8% of adults and substantially impairs quality of life. Surgical options carry higher risk and cost, and evidence for minimally invasive alternatives, such as anal inserts, is limited. Objective: To determine whether a novel anal insert achieves a clinically meaningful reduction in FI severity compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical superiority trial was conducted from May 26, 2021, to August 1, 2024, with 8 weeks of treatment and 4 weeks of follow-up at 2 outpatient hospital clinics in the Netherlands. Participants were individuals aged 16 to 90 years with FI (Rome IV criteria) with at least 1 FI episode during a 14-day run-in period. Data were analyzed from August 2 to December 20, 2024. Intervention: A single-use anal insert compared with usual care alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was proportion of participants achieving a reduction of at least 3 points in the St Mark's incontinence score from baseline to 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes included FI-specific quality of life, anxiety, depression, adverse events, and weekly FI episodes (post hoc outcome). Results: A total of 73 participants were screened and 72 were randomized (60 [83.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 67.3 [9.8] years]), with 35 participants receiving the insert and 37 receiving usual care. There was no significant difference in reduction in St Mark's score (9 participants [25.7%] in the insert group vs 7 participants [18.9%] in the control group; relative risk, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.57 to 3.25]). Coping (mean between-group difference, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.35]) and depression (mean between-group difference, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.30]) domains of the quality-of-life assessment improved more with the insert group, whereas lifestyle and embarrassment domains of the quality-of-life assessment, anxiety, and overall depression showed no between-group differences. The insert reduced FI episodes (estimated mean difference, -3.09 [95% CI, -4.39 to -1.75] episodes per week) and increased the proportion achieving more than 50% reduction in FI episodes. No serious adverse events occurred; device-related adverse events were common but mild. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the primary outcome of achieving a reduction of at least 3 points in St Mark's incontinence score was not met; however, the anal insert improved selected FI-specific quality-of-life domains. These findings suggest that the device may provide a minimally invasive option for selected patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04657588.

Indexed as

Fecal IncontinenceAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42048080
PMCPMC13126214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.