Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

PRISMA study flow diagram.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

PRISMA study flow diagram.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 2 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 2 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (subjective).

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 3 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 3 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 10 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 10 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 19 Numbers experiencing adverse events.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.19

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 19 Numbers experiencing adverse events.

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 20 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.20

Comparison 1 Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training, Outcome 20 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 2 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (objective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 2 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (objective).

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 3 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 3 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 4 Numbers not improved end of treatment treatment (objective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 4 Numbers not improved end of treatment treatment (objective).

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 5 Nocturia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 5 Nocturia.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 6 Number of micturitions per day.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 6 Number of micturitions per day.

Study

Anticholinergic

Electric stimulation

Smith 1996

8.1, range 0‐16

6.5, range 0‐18

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 7 Number of pad changes per day‐IVS.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 8 Sensation of urgency.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 8 Sensation of urgency.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 9 Number of incontinence episodes per day.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 9 Number of incontinence episodes per day.

Study

Trospium hydrochloride 45mg Median (Range)

Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation Median (Range)

Ozdedeli 2010

6 (3.3‐14.7) week 6 (17 participants)

7 (0.6‐15) week 6 (18 participants)

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 10 Number of micturitions per day.

Study

Trospium hydrochloride 45mg Median (Range)

Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation Median (Range)

Ozdedeli 2010

2.7 (0‐8) week 6 (17 participants)

1.7 (0‐13) week 6 (18 Participants)

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 11 Sensation of urgency.

Study

Trospium hydrochloride 45mg Median (Range)

Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation Median (Range)

Ozdedeli 2010

1 (0‐5) week 6 (17 participants)

1 (0‐5) 0.3 (0‐9) week 6 (18 participants)

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 12 Number of incontinence episodes per day.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 13 Numbers experiencing adverse events.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.13

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 13 Numbers experiencing adverse events.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 14 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.14

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 14 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 15 Quality of Life.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.15

Comparison 3 Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation, Outcome 15 Quality of Life.

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).

Study

Antichol. + BT

BT ALONE

Average SD

percentage change from baseline

Park 2002

30.3%

32.6%

27.1%

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 3 Number of micturitions per day.

Study

Antichol + BT

Antichol. + BT

percentage change from baseline

Park 2002

63.2%

48.4%

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 4 Sensation of urgency.

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 5 Numbers experiencing adverse events.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone, Outcome 5 Numbers experiencing adverse events.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (objective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (objective).

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 3 Numbers with nocturia end of treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 3 Numbers with nocturia end of treatment.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 5 Frequency of sensation of urgency.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 5 Frequency of sensation of urgency.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 6 Number of pad changes per day.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 6 Number of pad changes per day.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 7 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.7

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 7 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 8 Numbers experiencing adverse events.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.8

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 8 Numbers experiencing adverse events.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 9 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.9

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 9 Numbers withdrawing from treatment.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 10 Numbers changing dose of treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.10

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 10 Numbers changing dose of treatment.

Study

Anticholinergic + behavioural

Anticholinergic alone

Percentage change from baseline

Mattiasson 2003

87%

81%

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.11

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 11 Number of incontinence episodes per day.

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 12 Quality of Life.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.12

Comparison 6 Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone, Outcome 12 Quality of Life.

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 2 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective).

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 3 Nocturia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 3 Nocturia.

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours.

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 5 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.5

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 5 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours.

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 6 Quality of Life.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.6

Comparison 7 Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies, Outcome 6 Quality of Life.

Comparison 1. Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

2

56

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.26, 1.04]

1.1 Oxybutinin

1

27

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.02, 1.39]

1.2 Probantheline 45mg daily

1

29

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.34, 1.49]

2 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

2

56

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.16, 2.21]

2.1 Oxybutinin

1

27

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [0.45, 2.78]

2.2 Probantheline 45mg daily

1

29

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.10, 0.83]

3 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

7

346

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [0.61, 0.91]

3.1 Oxybutynin 5mg daily

2

109

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.29, 0.84]

3.2 Oxybutynin 15mg daily

1

27

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.46 [0.05, 4.53]

3.3 Oxybutynin 45mg daily

1

75

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.62, 1.07]

3.4 Probantheline 45mg daily

1

29

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.74, 1.32]

3.5 Tolterodine 4mg daily

2

106

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.53, 1.27]

4 Numbers not improved at follow up after treatment (subjective)

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Numbers with nocturia at end of treatment

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Numbers with nocturia at follow up after treatment

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Number of pad changes per 24hrs

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Mean weight of urine loss on pad test

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Number of micturitions per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

87

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.21 [‐2.87, 2.45]

10.1 Probantheline 45mg daily

1

29

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐3.29, 3.49]

10.2 Tolterodine

1

58

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.70 [‐4.99, 3.59]

11 Frequency of sensation of urgency

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 Numbers not cured within first year (objective)

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13 Numbers not cured after first year (objective)

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14 Number not cured after 5 years (objective)

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15 Urodynamic diagnosed detrusor overactivity

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16 General health status (SF‐36)

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17 Condition‐specific health measures

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18 Socioeconomic measures

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19 Numbers experiencing adverse events Show forest plot

4

258

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

14.50 [5.02, 41.87]

19.1 Oxybutynin 15mg daily

1

77

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

9.24 [2.30, 37.12]

19.2 Oxybutynin 45mg daily

1

75

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

28.26 [1.75, 457.09]

19.3 Tolterodine 4mg daily

2

106

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.76 [2.43, 129.70]

20 Numbers withdrawing from treatment Show forest plot

2

139

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.98 [0.46, 8.50]

20.1 Oxybutynin 15mg daily

1

81

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.86 [0.36, 9.58]

20.2 Tolterodine 4mg daily

1

58

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.45 [0.10, 57.85]

21 Numbers changing dose of treatment

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

22 Other outcomes

0

0

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Anticholinergic drugs versus bladder training
Comparison 3. Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

3

171

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.84, 1.05]

1.1 Oxybutinin 2.5 mg tds vs Intravaginal stimulation

1

47

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 [0.88, 1.36]

1.2 Probantheline vs Intravaginal stimulation

1

38

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.39, 1.06]

1.3 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

86

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.90, 1.06]

2 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (objective) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

3

171

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.64 [1.15, 2.34]

3.1 Oxybutinin 2.5 mg tds vs Intravaginal stimulation

1

47

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.46 [0.82, 2.60]

3.2 Probantheline vs Intravaginal stimulation

1

38

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.3 [0.74, 2.28]

3.3 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

86

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.21 [1.13, 4.33]

4 Numbers not improved end of treatment treatment (objective) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Nocturia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Number of micturitions per day Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Number of pad changes per day‐IVS Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

8 Sensation of urgency Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Number of incontinence episodes per day Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Number of micturitions per day Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

11 Sensation of urgency Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

12 Number of incontinence episodes per day Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

13 Numbers experiencing adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

13.1 Trospium HCl versus intravaginal electrical stimulation

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14 Numbers withdrawing from treatment Show forest plot

2

149

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.92 [0.48, 17.80]

14.1 Oxybutinin 2.5 mg tds vs Intravaginal stimulation

1

51

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.88 [0.32, 25.92]

14.2 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

98

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.13, 71.89]

15 Quality of Life Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15.1 E R Tolterodine 4mg vs PTNS

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Anticholinergic drugs versus external electrostimulation
Comparison 5. Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Numbers not cured end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

1

52

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.75, 1.16]

1.1 Oxybutynin 5mg daily +Bladder Training vs. Bladder Training

1

52

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.75, 1.16]

2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

3

164

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.38, 0.88]

2.1 Tolterodine 4mg daily +Bladder Training vs.Bladder Training

2

107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.38, 1.02]

2.2 Oxybutynin 5mg daily + Bladder Training vs. Bladder Training

1

57

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.21, 1.08]

3 Number of micturitions per day Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

3.1 percentage change from baseline

Other data

No numeric data

4 Sensation of urgency Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

4.1 percentage change from baseline

Other data

No numeric data

5 Numbers experiencing adverse events Show forest plot

2

107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.57 [2.43, 127.09]

5.1 Tolterodine 4mg daily +Bladder Training vs.Bladder Training

2

107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.57 [2.43, 127.09]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus non‐drug therapies alone
Comparison 6. Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Numbers not cured at follow up after treatment (objective) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Numbers not improved end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

6

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Tolterodine + Bladder training vs. Tolterodine

3

602

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.62, 1.04]

2.2 Tolterodine + PFMT vs. Tolterodine

1

475

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.29 [0.85, 1.94]

2.3 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

2

364

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.59 [0.36, 0.95]

3 Numbers with nocturia end of treatment Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Darifenacin and behavioural modification therapy vs. Darifenacin

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Trospium chloride + Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training vs. Trospium chloride

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours Show forest plot

6

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 Solifenacin + Bladder training vs. Solifenacin

1

602

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.69 [‐1.11, ‐0.27]

4.2 Tolterodine + PFMT vs. Tolterodine

1

475

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.87, 0.97]

4.3 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

3

705

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.24 [‐0.98, 0.50]

4.4 Anticholinergic and Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training vs.Anticholinergic .

1

30

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐2.0 [‐3.88, ‐0.12]

5 Frequency of sensation of urgency Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 Tolterodine 4mg + PFMT vs tolterodine alone

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.3 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Number of pad changes per day Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.2 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours Show forest plot

5

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

1

602

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.15 [‐0.42, 0.12]

7.2 Anticholinergic + PFMT vs. Anticholinergic

1

475

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.30 [‐0.12, 0.72]

7.3 Anticholinergic vs.Anticholinergic and Behavioural modification therapy

2

438

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.06 [‐0.47, 0.35]

7.4 Anticholinergic and Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training vs.Anticholinergic .

1

30

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.0 [‐2.12, 0.12]

8 Numbers experiencing adverse events Show forest plot

4

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

8.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

4

1257

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.88, 1.07]

9 Numbers withdrawing from treatment Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

2

706

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.44, 1.53]

9.2 Anticholinergic and behavioural modification therapy vs. Anticholinergic

1

395

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.64 [0.93, 2.87]

10 Numbers changing dose of treatment Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Number of incontinence episodes per day Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

11.1 Percentage change from baseline

Other data

No numeric data

12 Quality of Life Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

12.1 Anticholinergic + Bladder training vs. Anticholinergic

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12.2 Anticholinergic and Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training vs.Anticholinergic .

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 6. Anticholinergic drugs in combination with non‐drug therapies versus anticholinergic drugs alone
Comparison 7. Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Numbers not cured at end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Oxybutynin vs behavioural

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Numbers not improved at end of treatment (subjective) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 Oxybutynin vs behavioural

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Nocturia Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Trospium vs. Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Number of micturitions per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

153

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [‐0.21, 1.42]

4.1 Oxybutynin vs. behavioural

1

124

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.46, 1.26]

4.2 Trospium vs. Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training

1

29

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.2 [‐0.22, 4.62]

5 Number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours Show forest plot

3

203

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.41 [0.11, 0.70]

5.1 Oxybutynin vs. behavioural

2

174

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [0.01, 0.63]

5.2 Trospium 15mgs TDS vs. Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training

1

29

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.4 [0.35, 2.45]

6 Quality of Life Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 Trospium vs. Inferential current therapy + pelvic floor exercises + Bladder training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 7. Anticholinergic drugs versus combination non‐drug therapies