Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Topics

Temas

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Preference: number not preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Preference: number not preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 9 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 9 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.7

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.8

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.9

Comparison 6 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day), Outcome 9 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 2 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.5

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.6

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.7

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.8

Comparison 7 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.4

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.5

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.6

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.7

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.8

Comparison 8 Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.6

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.7

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.8

Comparison 9 Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.7

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.8

Comparison 10 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.4

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.5

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.6

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.7

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.8

Comparison 11 Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.2

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.4

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.5

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.6

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.7

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.8

Comparison 12 Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.1

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.2

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.3

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.4

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.5

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.6

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.7

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 7 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 13.8

Comparison 13 Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night), Outcome 8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.1

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.2

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 2 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.3

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 3 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.4

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 4 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.5

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 5 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Preference: number preferring design.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.6

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 6 Preference: number preferring design.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 14.7

Comparison 14 Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night), Outcome 7 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva
Comparison 1. Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.27 [1.33, 3.86]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.47 [1.22, 4.99]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.02 [0.89, 4.56]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.43 [1.05, 5.66]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.54 [0.86, 7.53]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.29 [0.60, 8.72]

3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [0.20, 0.81]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.39 [0.18, 0.84]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.09, 2.43]

4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.28 [1.06, 4.93]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.33, 2.73]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

6.23 [2.02, 19.23]

5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.87 [1.18, 2.97]

5.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.99 [0.91, 4.35]

5.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.81 [1.02, 3.21]

6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.85 [0.57, 1.28]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.48, 1.77]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.48, 1.36]

7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.49 [0.77, 2.91]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.30, 1.57]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

6.11 [2.00, 18.68]

8 Preference: number not preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.77, 1.83]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.41, 1.17]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.61 [1.70, 7.65]

9 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.13, 0.68]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.17 [0.06, 0.45]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.07 [0.24, 4.88]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 2. Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.95 [1.50, 5.78]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.64 [1.08, 6.43]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.42 [1.22, 9.56]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.24 [0.90, 5.55]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.85 [0.58, 5.93]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.01 [0.70, 12.97]

3 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.35, 1.43]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.33, 1.59]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.13, 3.08]

4 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.74 [0.91, 3.31]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.31, 1.87]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

4.16 [1.65, 10.49]

5 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.16 [1.57, 2.95]

5.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.11 [1.51, 2.96]

5.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.45 [1.04, 5.80]

6 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.59 [0.37, 0.95]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [0.32, 1.15]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.29, 1.15]

7 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.32 [0.66, 2.65]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.23, 1.45]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

4.17 [1.41, 12.33]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.10, 0.54]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.30]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.22, 2.95]

9 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.15 [0.76, 1.75]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [0.44, 1.25]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.63 [1.29, 5.34]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 3. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.63, 1.61]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.20, 1.16]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.36 [0.78, 2.35]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.40, 2.54]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.79 [0.20, 3.08]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.35, 4.42]

3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.47 [0.22, 1.00]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.08, 0.75]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.29, 2.33]

4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.09, 0.37]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.13 [0.06, 0.28]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.14, 2.58]

5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.29, 1.73]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.26 [0.06, 1.13]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.41, 3.89]

6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.72, 1.61]

6.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.43, 2.14]

6.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.71, 1.78]

7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.02 [0.67, 1.56]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.53, 1.66]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.13 [0.61, 2.12]

8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.22, 1.04]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.10, 0.77]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.31, 3.07]

9 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.45, 1.08]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.16, 0.53]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.81 [0.96, 3.41]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 4. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.22, 0.60]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.09, 0.41]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.31, 1.30]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.41 [0.18, 0.94]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.31 [0.10, 1.00]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.17, 1.71]

3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.22 [0.49, 3.01]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [0.38, 4.99]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.30, 3.84]

4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.26, 0.86]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.47 [0.25, 0.87]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.08, 4.18]

5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.11, 0.49]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.07, 0.98]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.09, 0.54]

6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.34, 0.92]

6.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.22, 1.04]

6.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.33, 1.18]

7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.68, 1.57]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.59, 1.98]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.55, 1.77]

8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.15, 0.51]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.37 [0.17, 0.84]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.08, 0.47]

9 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [0.25, 0.62]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.39 [0.22, 0.68]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.41 [0.20, 0.87]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 5. Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.46, 1.86]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.18, 1.49]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.46 [0.57, 3.75]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.30, 2.30]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.16, 2.03]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.63 [0.30, 8.87]

3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.12, 0.63]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.13 [0.04, 0.39]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.21, 2.65]

4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.12, 0.47]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.09, 0.40]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 [0.16, 7.53]

5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.46 [0.21, 1.01]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.04, 0.55]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.33, 2.38]

6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.35 [0.86, 2.10]

6.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.43, 2.27]

6.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.53 [0.90, 2.58]

7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.48, 1.01]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.34, 1.38]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.45, 1.08]

8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.20, 0.90]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.10, 0.78]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.24, 2.03]

9 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.40, 0.92]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.39 [0.22, 0.70]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.54, 1.86]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 6. Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.22 [0.65, 2.28]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.47, 2.49]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.43 [0.55, 3.69]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.35, 2.47]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.21, 2.59]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.32 [0.28, 6.21]

3 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.59 [0.36, 0.99]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.32, 1.02]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.22, 2.04]

4 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.39 [0.83, 2.35]

4.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.39 [0.77, 2.50]

4.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.41 [0.45, 4.40]

5 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.29, 1.05]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.23, 1.08]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.22, 2.20]

6 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.25 [0.80, 1.96]

6.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.49, 2.31]

6.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.36 [0.78, 2.37]

7 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.44, 1.15]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.36, 1.39]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.36, 1.41]

8 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.83 [0.47, 1.47]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.44, 1.75]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.26, 2.05]

9 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.70, 1.56]

9.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.60, 1.67]

9.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.60, 2.12]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 6. Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 7. Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.30 [0.67, 2.55]

1.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.79 [0.27, 2.34]

1.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.78 [0.76, 4.19]

2 Discreetness (invisibility under clothes): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [0.02, 0.11]

2.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.39]

2.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [0.01, 0.09]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.19, 0.62]

3.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.10, 0.52]

3.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.23, 1.24]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.20, 0.37]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.14, 0.43]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.20, 0.41]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.53, 1.39]

5.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.90 [0.40, 2.02]

5.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.46, 1.52]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.30 [0.16, 0.57]

6.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [0.26, 2.13]

6.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.17 [0.08, 0.39]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.08, 0.30]

7.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.03, 0.30]

7.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.09, 0.42]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.18 [0.09, 0.33]

8.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.17 [0.08, 0.38]

8.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.18 [0.06, 0.53]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 7. Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (day)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 8. Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.95 [1.16, 3.27]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.54 [0.77, 3.04]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.69 [1.21, 5.98]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.01 [0.79, 5.13]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.62 [0.43, 6.12]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.49 [0.66, 9.33]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.37 [0.67, 2.80]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.85 [0.33, 2.22]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.48 [0.86, 7.22]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.62 [1.05, 2.51]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.50 [0.60, 3.72]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.66 [1.01, 2.74]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.30 [0.78, 2.17]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.57 [0.79, 3.16]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.49, 2.21]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.65 [1.30, 5.39]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.31 [0.56, 3.07]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

13.21 [3.64, 47.89]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.10 [1.34, 3.29]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.47 [0.85, 2.53]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

4.38 [2.00, 9.58]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.41, 1.93]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.26, 1.57]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.27 [0.51, 10.16]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 8. Disposable insert pad versus disposable diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 9. Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.01 [1.15, 3.49]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.79 [0.89, 3.57]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.47 [0.98, 6.22]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.45 [0.60, 3.50]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.39, 2.77]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

6.30 [0.80, 49.62]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [0.69, 2.28]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.78 [0.33, 1.86]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.91 [0.84, 4.33]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.70 [1.06, 2.73]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.55 [0.80, 3.02]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.86 [0.94, 3.69]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.29 [0.80, 2.08]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.64, 2.51]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.30 [0.66, 2.56]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.62 [1.37, 5.01]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.37 [0.57, 3.27]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

5.82 [2.21, 15.33]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.03 [1.32, 3.12]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.53 [0.90, 2.61]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.45 [1.67, 7.14]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.85 [0.41, 1.73]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.30, 1.65]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.33 [0.35, 5.08]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 9. Disposable insert pad versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 10. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.33, 0.89]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.18, 0.73]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.40, 1.65]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.27, 1.77]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.20, 2.24]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.16, 3.30]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.11, 0.48]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.06, 0.44]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.12, 1.02]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.59 [0.38, 0.91]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.45 [0.17, 1.19]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.63 [0.39, 1.03]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.44, 1.17]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.27, 1.12]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.91 [0.47, 1.76]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.15, 0.51]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.12, 0.70]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.10, 0.62]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.21, 0.52]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.20, 0.63]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.14, 0.60]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.72 [0.75, 3.91]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.49 [0.53, 4.23]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.17 [0.56, 8.34]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 10. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable insert pad (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 11. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 [0.67, 1.81]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.28, 1.15]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.08 [1.04, 4.17]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.39 [0.56, 3.43]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.30, 3.89]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.78 [0.49, 6.42]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.24, 1.16]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.07, 0.72]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.38, 3.29]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.65, 1.44]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.26, 1.69]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.67, 1.63]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.54, 1.19]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.38, 1.37]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.85 [0.51, 1.42]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.52, 2.43]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.42 [0.15, 1.19]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.94 [1.22, 12.74]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.25 [0.81, 1.92]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.42, 1.22]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

3.47 [1.68, 7.17]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.55 [0.95, 6.88]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.65 [0.46, 5.84]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

5.10 [1.04, 25.11]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 11. Disposable pull‐up versus disposable diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 12. Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.13 [0.66, 1.93]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.37, 1.58]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.82 [0.81, 4.07]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.37, 2.90]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.20, 2.09]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

4.51 [0.57, 35.59]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.20, 0.92]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.08, 0.69]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.79 [0.26, 2.34]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.70, 1.66]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.24, 1.99]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.73, 1.89]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.62, 1.28]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.42, 1.15]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.69, 2.02]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.50, 1.80]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.19, 1.32]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.56 [0.66, 3.65]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.63, 1.45]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.66 [0.38, 1.14]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.53 [0.82, 2.85]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.54 [0.67, 3.54]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.40, 3.11]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.86 [0.69, 11.76]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 12. Disposable pull‐up versus T‐shaped diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 13. Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.56, 1.66]

1.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.45, 2.08]

1.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.45, 2.08]

2 Prevention of leakage (faeces): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

200

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.91 [0.30, 2.77]

2.1 women

1

146

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.59 [0.16, 2.22]

2.2 men

1

54

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

2.53 [0.33, 19.53]

3 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.42, 1.34]

3.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.38, 1.85]

3.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.65 [0.27, 1.54]

4 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.71, 1.67]

4.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.38, 2.46]

4.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.69, 1.82]

5 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.73, 1.62]

5.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.57, 1.65]

5.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [0.69, 2.31]

6 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.45, 1.41]

6.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.55, 2.06]

6.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.12, 1.09]

7 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.40, 0.92]

7.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.49, 1.36]

7.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.18, 0.71]

8 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

4

370

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.34, 1.58]

8.1 women

2

218

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.39, 2.46]

8.2 men

2

152

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.37 [0.09, 1.53]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 13. Disposable diaper versus disposable T‐shaped diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 14. Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Prevention of leakage (urine): number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.07 [0.44, 2.62]

1.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.18, 1.38]

1.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

14.29 [2.20, 92.57]

2 Staying in place: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.25, 1.55]

2.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.39 [0.11, 1.41]

2.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.28, 3.61]

3 Mean number of incontinence laundry items per 24 hours Show forest plot

2

170

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.40, 0.68]

3.1 women

1

72

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [0.17, 0.59]

3.2 men

1

98

mean (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.44, 0.77]

4 Skin health problems: number recording a little/a lot versus none Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.90 [0.55, 1.47]

4.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.21, 1.59]

4.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.59, 1.80]

5 Overall opinion: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.42 [0.24, 0.73]

5.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.08, 0.45]

5.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [0.36, 1.54]

6 Preference: number preferring design Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.51, 1.30]

6.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.11, 0.55]

6.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

1.45 [0.82, 2.56]

7 Ease of putting on: number rating design poor versus good/okay Show forest plot

2

170

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.18 [0.08, 0.40]

7.1 women

1

72

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.08, 0.49]

7.2 men

1

98

odds ratio (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.13 [0.02, 0.73]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 14. Disposable diaper versus washable diaper (night)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión