Evidence based treatment of urinary incontinence

This document was published more than 2 years ago. The nature of the evidence may have changed.

Assessment Objectives

This report presents an SBU assessment of methods used to treat the most common types of urinary incontinence in adults. The report addresses the prevalence of urinary incontinence in relation to age and gender, the methods used to diagnose incontinence, the cost-effectiveness of treatment, and issues related to education and the organization of services.

Assessment Strategy

Systematic review of the scientific literature.

Primary Data Collection

In developing this report, SBU expanded on information presented in a study from the US Department of Health and Human Services (AHCPR Report, 1996). The SBU Project Group further reviewed the literature referenced in the AHCPR report, conducted a comprehensive and systemic review of studies published since 1996, and reviewed areas not covered in the AHCPR report. The economic and organizational issues presented in the SBU report are based in part on new analyses and investigations by the SBU Project Group.

Data Criteria; Types of Studies Included

In this report, regular incontinence is defined as an incontinent episode at least once per week. The scientific studies presented in each chapter were assessed according to a special quality formula.

Review of Publications

The Project Group extensively discussed each chapter and the literature cited. Two independent members of the Group reviewed certain key studies. The manuscript was revised by five external reviewers and approved by the SBU Scientific Advisory Committee and the SBU Board of Directors.

How to cite this report: SBU. Evidence based treatment of urinary incontinence. Stockholm: Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU); 2000. SBU report no 143 (in Swedish).

Download summary

SBU Assessment presents a comprehensive, systematic assessment of available scientific evidence. The certainty of the evidence for each finding is systematically reviewed and graded. Full assessments include economic, social, and ethical impact analyses.

SBU assessments are performed by a team of leading professional practitioners and academics, patient/user representatives and SBU staff. Prior to approval and publication, assessments are reviewed by independent experts, SBU’s Scientific Advisory Committees and Board of Directors.

Published: 1/1/2000
Report no: 143