Conservative management for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence is common after both radical prostatectomy and transurethral resection. Conservative management includes pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback, electrical stimulation, compression devices (penile clamps), lifestyle changes, extra-corporeal magnetic innervation or a combination of methods. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of conservative managements for urinary incontinence prostatectomy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group trials register (searched 2 July 2003), MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2004), EMBASE (January 1988 to January 2004), CINAHL (January 1982 to January 2004), PsycLIT (January 1984 to January 2004), ERIC (January 1984 to January 2004), the reference lists of relevant articles, handsearched conference proceedings and contacted investigators to locate studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials evaluating conservative interventions for urinary continence after prostatectomy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of trials and abstracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials met the inclusion criteria, eight trials amongst men after radical prostatectomy, one trial after transurethral resection of prostate and one after either operation. There was considerable variation in the interventions, populations and outcome measures. The trials were of moderate quality and data were not available for many of the pre-stated outcomes. Confidence intervals were wide: it was not possible to reliably identify or rule out a useful effect. There was some support from five trials for pelvic floor muscle training with biofeedback being better than no treatment or sham treatment in the short term for men after radical prostatectomy: relative risk for incontinence with pelvic floor muscle training and biofeedback versus no treatment: 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.93). Analysis of other conservative interventions such as pelvic floor muscle training alone, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and rectal electrical stimulation, or combinations of these interventions were inconclusive. There were too few data to determine effects on incontinence after transurethral resection of the prostate. The findings should be treated with caution as there were few studies, all of moderate quality. Men in one trial reported a preference for one type of external compression device compared to two others or no treatment. The effect of other conservative interventions such as lifestyle changes remains undetermined as no trials involving these interventions were identified. Men's symptoms tended to improve over time, irrespective of management. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: The value of the various approaches to conservative management of postprostatectomy incontinence remains uncertain. There may be some benefit of offering pelvic floor muscle training with biofeedback early in the postoperative period immediately following removal of the catheter as it may promote an earlier return to continence. Long-term incontinence may be managed by external penile clamp, but there are safety problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".