Preliminary Experience With a Urinary Control Device in the Management of Women With Genuine Stress Incontinence

Tincello, DG; Bolderson, Jill; Richmond, D. H.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(01)61881-0

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Reliance Insert [8,9] required actual insertion of a device inside the urethra, but met with limited success. Most recently, the Femassist urethral occlusive device requires patients to part the labia and apply a silastic object to the external urethral meatus [10,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes to Vaginal/Urethral Touching and Device Placement in Women with Urinary Incontinence

Prashar

Simons

Bryant³

et al. 2000

Int Urogynecol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of recent development of a number of intravaginal and urethral occlusive devices for the treatment of urinary incontinence, we aimed to develop a linear analog scale that measured women's attitudes to becoming familiar with their genital anatomy and to placing devices into or upon the vagina or urethral orifices. We also investigated whether such attitudes were affected by previous tampon or diaphragm use, or were age dependent. After pilot studies, a 10-item questionnaire was given to 104 consecutive incontinent women, only 30% of whom were quite comfortable about the concept of touching their genitalia: this attitude was age dependent. Only 21% were quite willing to insert a continence device into their vagina: this attitude varied weakly with age but was significantly affected by previous tampon or diaphragm usage. Only 15% felt very comfortable about placing a continence device on to their urethra, but the likelihood of a positive response to this concept was not at all affected by age and was only slightly more common in previous tampon users. Thus older women are less likely to understand the anatomy of their genitalia or to be comfortable about the idea of exploring it, but age is no barrier to willingness to employ urethral or vaginal continence devices per se. We suggest that such a linear analog questionnaire may help gynecologists determine which patients might respond well to the use of vaginal or urethral continence devices.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes to Vaginal/Urethral Touching and Device Placement in Women with Urinary Incontinence

Prashar

Simons

Bryant³

et al. 2000

Int Urogynecol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FemAssist can be washed in warm water and replaced and reused for a recommended period of 1 week. 2,3 In the study by Tincello et al,2 FemAssist demonstrated a decrease in the mean urine loss from 21 mL (range 1-94 mL) prior to use of the plug to 4.9 mL (range 0-65 mL) after its proper use. Fifty-six percent of the patients reported they were pleased with the device and would use it long term.…”

Section: Urethral Caps: Femassistmentioning

confidence: 98%

Urethral Devices for Managing Stress Urinary Incontinence

Elliott¹,

Boone²

2000

Journal of Endourology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although surgery remains the gold standard for managing the majority of patients with stress urinary incontinence or retention, not all patients are suitable candidates or desire surgery. For these patients, several urethral caps and inserts are available, which are described. In approximately 50% of patients, satisfactory control is achieved. Further investigation undoubtedly will yield better devices to serve the large number of patients with urinary control problems.

show abstract

“…10 FemAssist device in place, and after the device had been positioned by a nurse. Median urine loss was 21 ml (range 1-94 ml) without the device and 4.9 ml (range 0-65 ml) with the device in place (p , 0.01, Wilcoxon matched-pairs test).…”

Section: External Occlusive Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%