Patient‐reported outcomes in the setting of a randomized control trial on the efficacy of transcutaneous stimulation of the posterior tibial nerve compared to percutaneous stimulation in idiopathic overactive bladder syndrome
Aim To compare the efficacy of transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) with percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) regarding patient-reported outcomes measures, specifically quality-of-life (QoL) improvement and patient's treatment benefit, on symptoms associated with overactive bl...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Ramon Llull (URL) |
| Repositorio: | DAU Arxiu Digital de la Universitat Ramon Llull |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:dau_________::1a45da9cfa44e88e628bd26ebfbdb2b3 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/6381 https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24554 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | OAB-q-SF Bufeta hiperactiva PTNS Qualitat de vida Estimulació eléctrica Nervi tibial Escala de beneficis del tractament |
| Sumario: | Aim To compare the efficacy of transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) with percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) regarding patient-reported outcomes measures, specifically quality-of-life (QoL) improvement and patient's treatment benefit, on symptoms associated with overactive bladder (OAB). Methods Patients with refractory OAB symptoms and detrusor overactivity were randomized to receive TTNS or PTNS for 12 weeks. Data from self-report OAB questionnaire short form (q-SF) and incontinence (I)-QoL questionnaires were collected pretreatment and at Weeks 6 and 12. Patients’ self-perceived benefits on symptoms (treatment benefit scale, TBS) were also gathered. Mean change in scores within and between groups were estimated. Results Sixty-eight adult patients (67.6% women) were included in the intention to treat analysis. Of those, 61 completed all questionnaires and were analyzed as per protocol. Statistically significant improvements in OAB-q-SF and I-QoL between baseline and end-of-treatment scores were observed in both TTNS and PTNS groups (p < .001), being the differences much higher than the minimal important difference in both questionnaires. The scores of the OAB-q-SF scales (symptoms bother and health-related QoL) showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Similarly, the differences regarding the I-QoL questionnaire were statistically nonsignificant either (p = .607). When assessing the treatment benefit on symptoms, TBS responses between groups showed no statistical differences. Conclusion A significant improvement of QoL was observed in both TTNS and PTNS groups. However, no patient-reported outcomes measures scores support a difference between the two groups. Therefore, these findings along with TTNS ease of application and less invasiveness may lead to an increased indication of this technique for OAB. |
|---|