Guideline:
Urinary incontinence in women
Bibliographic Source(s)
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Urinary incontinence in women. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2005 Jun. 13 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 63). [70 references]
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Guideline Category
Diagnosis
Management
Treatment
Intended Users
Physicians
Guideline Objective(s)
- To aid practitioners in making decisions about appropriate obstetric and gynecologic care
- To consider the best available evidence for evaluating and treating urinary incontinence in women
Target Population
Women with urinary incontinence
Interventions and Practices Considered
Diagnosis
- Medical and medication history
- Voiding diary
- Physical examination including gynecologic and lower neurologic examinations
- Measurement of urethral mobility
- Urinalysis
- Blood tests (blood urea nitrogen creatinine glucose calcium) for suspected renal compromise
- Urine cytology in limited cases
- Voiding assessment of urinary bladder (transurethral catheterization ultrasound)
- Urodynamic tests (cystometry uroflowmetry postvoid residual urine volume pressure flow voiding study electromyography)
- Cystourethroscopy
- Urethral pressure profilometry and leak point pressure measurement – not recommended
Management
- Absorbent products
- Behavioral modification (lifestyle intervention scheduled or prompted voiding bladder training pelvic muscle rehabilitation)
- Medical management (estrogen anticholinergic agents [oxybutynin chloride tolterodine] tricyclic antidepressants [imipramine] musculotropic drugs)
- Surgical treatments (retropubic laparoscopic or open Burch colposuspension and sling procedures tension-free vaginal tape procedure anterior colporrhaphy pubovaginal fascial bladder neck sling)
- Injection of bulking agents (collagen carbon-coated beads fat) as second-line therapy or for women ineligible for surgery
- Pessaries
- Hysterectomy (for concomitant uterine prolapse or specific uterine pathology)
- Paravaginal defect repair (not recommended as primary treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence)
Major Outcomes Considered
- Cure rate
- Relapse rate
- Duration of improvement
- Quality of life
- Patient satisfaction
- Complication rates of surgery
Methods Used to Collect/Select Evidence
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Primary Sources)
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Secondary Sources)
Searches of Electronic Databases
Description of Methods used to Collect/Select the Evidence
The MEDLINE database the Cochrane Library and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' own internal resources and documents were used to conduct a literature search to locate relevant articles published between January 1985 and February 2005. The search was restricted to articles published in the English language. Priority was given to articles reporting results of original research although review articles and commentaries also were consulted. Abstracts of research presented at symposia and scientific conferences were not considered adequate for inclusion in this document. Guidelines published by organizations or institutions such as the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists were reviewed and additional studies were located by reviewing bibliographies of identified articles.
Number of Source Documents
Not stated
Methods Used to Assess the Quality and Strength of the Evidence
Weighting According to a Rating Scheme (Scheme Given)
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Evidence
Studies were reviewed and evaluated for quality according to the method outlined by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force:
I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed randomized controlled trial.
II-1: Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization.
II-2: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies preferably from more than one center or research group.
II-3: Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments also could be regarded as this type of evidence.
III: Opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience descriptive studies or reports of expert committees.
Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Review of Published Meta-Analyses
Systematic Review
Description of the Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Not stated
Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Expert Consensus
Description of Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Analysis of available evidence was given priority in formulating recommendations. When reliable research was not available expert opinions from obstetrician–gynecologists were used. See also the "Rating Scheme for the Strength of" field regarding Grade C recommendations.
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Recommendations
Based on the highest level of evidence found in the data recommendations are provided and graded according to the following categories:
Level A — Recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence.
Level B — Recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence.
Level C — Recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion.
Cost Analysis
A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed.
Method of Guideline Validation
Internal Peer Review
Description of Method of Guideline Validation
Practice Bulletins are validated by two internal clinical review panels composed of practicing obstetrician-gynecologists generalists and sub-specialists. The final guidelines are also reviewed and approved by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Executive Board.
Major Recommendations
The grades of evidence (I-III) and levels of recommendation (A-C) are defined at the end of the "Major Recommendations" field.
The following recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence (Level A):
- Behavioral therapy including bladder training and prompted voiding improves symptoms of urge and mixed incontinence and can be recommended as a noninvasive treatment in many women.
- Pelvic floor training appears to be an effective treatment for adult women with stress and mixed incontinence and can be recommended as a noninvasive treatment for many women.
- Pharmacologic agents especially oxybutynin and tolterodine may have a small beneficial effect on improving symptoms of detrusor overactivity in women.
The following recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence (Level B):
- Cystometric testing is not required in the routine or basic evaluation of urinary incontinence.
- Bulking agents are a relatively noninvasive method of treatment for stress incontinence and can be used in women for whom any form of operative treatment is contraindicated.
- Long-term data suggest that Burch colposuspension and sling procedures have similar objective cure rates; therefore selection of treatment should be based on patient characteristics and the surgeon's experience.
- The combination of a hysterectomy and a Burch colposuspension does not result in higher continence rates than a Burch procedure alone.
- Tension-free vaginal tape and open Burch colposuspension have similar success rates.
- Anterior colporrhaphy needle urethropexy and paravaginal defect repair have lower cure rates for stress incontinence than Burch colposuspension.
The following recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion (Level C):
- After the basic evaluation of urinary incontinence simple cystometry is appropriate for detecting abnormalities of detrusor compliance and contractibility measuring postvoid residual volume and determining capacity.
- Patients with urinary incontinence should undergo a basic evaluation that includes a history physical examination measurement of postvoid residual volume and urinalysis.
Definitions:
Grades of Evidence
I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed randomized controlled trial.
II-1: Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization.
II-2: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies preferably from more than one center or research group.
II-3: Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments also could be regarded as this type of evidence.
III: Opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience descriptive studies or reports of expert committees.
Levels of Recommendations
Level A — Recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence.
Level B — Recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence.
Level C — Recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion.
Clinical Algorithm(s)
None provided
Type of Evidence supporting the Recommendations
The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for each recommendation (see "Major Recommendations").
Potential Benefits
Appropriate evaluation and management of patients with urinary incontinence
Potential Harms
Medical Intervention
- The response to pharmacologic treatment often is unpredictable and side effects are common with effective doses.
- The most typical side effect of anticholinergic therapy is dry mouth; other side effects most frequently reported were blurred vision constipation nausea dizziness and headache.
Surgical Intervention
- Intraoperative or immediate postoperative complications of surgery for stress incontinence include direct surgical injury to the lower urinary tract hemorrhage bowel injury wound complications retention and urinary tract infection. Gynecologic surgeons may perform cystoscopy during or after retropubic and sling procedures to verify ureteral patency and the absence of sutures or sling material in the bladder. Most of the chronic complications after Burch colposuspension and sling procedures relate to voiding dysfunction and urge symptoms (see Table 2 in the original guideline document).
- Retropubic suspensions and sling procedures are associated with slightly higher complication rates including longer convalescence and postoperative voiding dysfunction.
- A multicenter randomized trial found no difference between Burch colposuspension and tension-free vaginal tape procedures with objective cure rates for urodynamic stress incontinence of 57% and 66% respectively. Bladder injury was more common during the tension-free vaginal tape procedure (P = .013); delayed voiding operation time (P <.001) and return to normal activity (p <.001) were all longer after li>
Qualifying Statements
These guidelines should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure. Variations in practice may be warranted based on the needs of the individual patient resources and limitations unique to the institution or type of practice.
Description of Implementation Strategy
An implementation strategy was not provided.
Implementation Tools
Patient Resources
For information about availability see the "Availability of Companion Documents" and "Patient Resources" fields below.
IOM Care Need
Getting Better
Living with Illness
IOM Domain
Effectiveness
Patient-centeredness
Bibliographic Source(s)
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Urinary incontinence in women. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2005 Jun. 13 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 63). [70 references]
Adaptation
Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.
Source(s) of Funding
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)
Guideline Committee
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology
Composition of Group that Authored the Guideline
Not stated
Financial Disclosures/Conflicts of Interest
Not stated
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Guideline Availability
Electronic copies: None available
Print copies: Available for purchase from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Distribution Center PO Box 4500 Kearneysville WV 25430-4500; telephone 800-762-2264 ext. 192; e-mail: sales@acog.org. The ACOG Bookstore is available online at the ACOG Web site.
Availability of Companion Documents
None available
Patient Resources
The following is available:
- Urinary incontinence. Atlanta (GA): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2005.
Electronic copies: Available from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Web site.
Print copies: Available for purchase from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Distribution Center PO Box 4500 Kearneysville WV 25430-4500; telephone 800-762-2264 ext. 192; e-mail: sales@acog.org. The ACOG Bookstore is available online at the ACOG Web site.
Please note: This patient information is intended to provide health professionals with information to share with their patients to help them better understand their health and their diagnosed disorders. By providing access to this patient information it is not the intention of NGC to provide specific medical advice for particular patients. Rather we urge patients and their representatives to review this material and then to consult with a licensed health professional for evaluation of treatment options suitable for them as well as for diagnosis and answers to their personal medical questions. This patient information has been derived and prepared from a guideline for health care professionals included on NGC by the authors or publishers of that original guideline. The patient information is not reviewed by NGC to establish whether or not it accurately reflects the original guideline's content.
NGC STATUS
This NGC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on October 9 2007. The information was verified by the guideline developer on December 3 2007. This summary was updated by ECRI Institute on October 27 2008 following the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory on surgical mesh devices.
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This NGC summary is based on the original guideline which is subject to the guideline developer's copyright restrictions.
NGC Disclaimer
The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop produce approve or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.
All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies relevant professional associations public or private organizations other government agencies health care organizations or plans and similar entities.
Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx .
NGC AHRQ and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC AHRQ or its contractor ECRI Institute and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.
Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer.
Tools
No Quick Reference tools have been developed.