Incontinence Research - Urinary Incontinence, Bladder Control, Treatment, Causes

Incontinence Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Incontinence, including details on urinary incontinence, bladder control, treatment, causes.


Incontinence Research Today

Home

View Latest Issue

Information About Incontinence

Books on Incontinence

Advertising in Research Today

View Other Research Today Publications



"Unblinding" in randomized controlled drug trials for urinary incontinence: Implications for assessing outcomes when adverse effects are evident.

DuBeau CE, Khullar V, Versi E

Section of Geriatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA. cdubeau@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu

AIMS: To determine whether women with urinary incontinence (UI) can identify their allocation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of tolterodine (TOL), and whether correct identification is associated with outcomes and adverse effects (AEs). METHODS: Exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PLC)-controlled trial of TOL 4 mg daily for 8 weeks in 743 women with urge-predominant mixed UI. Patient perception of their randomization was assessed at trial end. Main outcome measures were 7-day bladder diaries, patient perception of improvement, and UI-specific quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: TOL produced a significant decrease in urge UI episodes compared to PLC (78% vs. 51%, P = 0.0001). Fifty-one percent of women correctly identified their randomization (58% on TOL vs. 37% on PLC, P < 0.001). Women who assumed they took TOL had better bladder diary outcomes than those who assumed they took PLC. Within each assumption group, patient perception outcomes were similar, regardless of actual randomization. QoL improved in all domains except general health for women on TOL. In women who assumed they took TOL, significant drug benefit was evident in three domains. Moderate-severe dry mouth was higher in those who assumed they took TOL (7.3% vs. 0%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Greater than fifty percent of women in this RCT of antimuscarinic treatment were "unblinded" to their randomization. Patient assumption of randomization was associated with bladder diary and perception outcomes, specific QoL domains, and dry mouth. Efficacy of urge incontinence drugs should be considered in the context of patient assumptions, expectations, and "unblinding" by easily evident side effects.

Published 15 December 2004 in Neurourol Urodyn, 24(1): 13-20.
Full-text of this article is available online (may require subscription).

Place a permanent text-link or advertisement here for just US$15.

© 2004-2008 Incontinence Research Today. All Rights Reserved.



Incontinence Research Today Archive:

Volume 1 (2004)
  Issue 1 (November)
  Issue 2 (December)

Volume 2 (2005)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 3 (2006)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 4 (2007)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 5 (2008)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)



Incontinence Books

A Woman's Guide to Urinary Incontinence (A Johns Hopkins Press Health Book)

A Woman's Guide to Urinary Incontinence (A Johns Hopkins Press Health Book)