This systematic review examined the use of incontinence-specific quality of life (QOL) measures in clinical trials of female incontinence treatments, and systematically evaluated their quality using a standard checklist. Of 61 trials included in the review, 58 (95.1%) used an incontinence-specific QOL measure. The most commonly used were IIQ (19 papers), I-QoL (12 papers) and UDI (9 papers). Eleven papers (18.0%) used measures which were not referenced or were developed specifically for the study. The eight QOL measures identified had good clinical face validity and measurement properties. We advise researchers to evaluate carefully the needs of their specific study, and select the QOL measure that is most appropriate in terms of validity, utility and relevance, and discourage the development of new measures. Until better evidence is available on the validity and comparability of measures, we recommend that researchers consider using IIQ or I-QOL with or without UDI in trials of incontinence treatments.

No abstract

No abstract

Our objective was to systematically review clinical studies of incontinence treatments for women that used pad tests to assess outcome, to determine how closely the ICS guidelines had been followed. Our review (Medline 1988-2000, plus referenced studies) identified 75 relevant papers, carrying out pad tests in clinics ( n = 53) or patients' homes ( n = 28). Clinic pad tests lasted between 60 seconds and 2 hours, with inconsistent starting bladder volumes, activities carried out, other test details and presentation of results. Home pad tests lasted between 1.5 and 48 hours: the conduct and reporting of these tests were also variable. Only 25 studies used pad tests that were apparently consistent with ICS guidelines. Pad tests are important in identifying urine loss in clinical evaluations; however, we found wide variations in their conduct and reporting. We recommend that the ICS should review the guidelines, and that further research should develop clinically valid pad tests. Authors and journal editors should ensure that pad test details are fully reported.