Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Prevention of exercise incontinence with mechanical devices
Nygaard I
The Journal of Reproductive Medicine 1995 Feb;40(2):89-94
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

A prospective, randomized, single-blind study addressed the hypothesis that simple mechanical barriers are helpful in controlling urinary incontinence during exercise. Eighteen incontinent exercisers aged 33-73 participated in three 40-minute standardized aerobics sessions wearing either a Hodge pessary with support, a super tampon or no mechanical device. Urine loss was determined by a change in the weight of the pad worn while exercising. Statistical analysis of the log of urine loss revealed that women lost significantly less urine when exercising with either the pessary or the tampon than when exercising with no device. Thus, both devices studied are useful, nonsurgical alternatives for some women for the treatment of exercise incontinence.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help