Trial reportBMC urology2026
Comparative efficacy of transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) versus solifenacin in female patients with overactive bladder.
Trial report in BMC urology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOveractive bladder (OAB) is commonly managed with antimuscarinic agents, although tolerability limits long-term adherence. Tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) has emerged as a non-pharmacologic alternative. This study compared the efficacy and safety of TNS versus solifenacin in women with OAB.
methodsIn this randomized controlled clinical trial, 118 patients met OAB diagnostic criteria, who presented to Qaem Hospital (Mashhad, Iran, 2023). Participants were randomly assigned to receive 12 weeks of either TNS (two 30-minute sessions weekly) or oral solifenacin (5 mg daily). Primary outcomes included changes in OAB symptom severity, urinary incontinence, and quality of life scores, using validated questionnaires at baseline and week 12. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS version 22, with significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsBoth treatments led to significant improvement in OAB symptoms, urinary incontinence severity, and quality of life (all p < 0.001). TNS produced slightly greater improvement in OAB symptom severity (p = 0.016) and significantly greater reduction in urinary incontinence severity (p = 0.015). Quality of life improved substantially in both groups (p < 0.001), with comparable post-treatment scores. Adverse effects occurred in 88.1% of solifenacin users, whereas no side effects were reported with TNS.
conclusionTNS is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for OAB, offering superior improvement in urinary incontinence and a markedly better safety profile compared with solifenacin. TNS may represent a preferable non-pharmacologic alternative for patients who cannot tolerate or do not respond adequately to anticholinergic medications. Future studies with larger cohorts and extended follow-up durations would be beneficial to validate and expand upon our findings.
trial registrationThe study protocol was officially registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials under the identifier IRCT20190618043934N25 on 2024-05-13.
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.