Evidence Hub

A randomized controlled pilot trial to assess the effectiveness of a specially formulated food supplement and pelvic floor muscle training in women with stress-predominant urinary incontinence

P. Takacs, K. Pákozdy, Erzsébet Koroknai, Balazs Erdodi, Z. Krasznai, Bence Kozma

BMC Women's Health, 2023

16 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Background Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is the first-line treatment approach for stress urinary incontinence. Creatine and leucine have been shown to improve muscle function. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of a food supplement and PFMT in women with stress-predominant urinary incontinence. Methods Women with stress-predominant urinary incontinence were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive daily oral supplementation for six weeks with either a food supplement (treatment group) or placebo (control group). Both groups were instructed to perform standardized daily PFMT. The primary outcome was the Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-6) score. Secondary outcomes were the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7) score, Patient’s Global Impression of Severity (PGI‐S), and Biomechanical Integrity score (BI-score) measured by Vaginal Tactile Imager. To have a power of 80% and a significance level of 5% to detect a decrease of 16 points in the UDI-6 score, a sample size of 32 was needed, with 16 patients in each arm of our trial. Results Sixteen women in the control group and sixteen in the treatment group completed the trial. Between-group analysis revealed no significant differences between the control and treatment group except for mean change (delta) in vaginal squeeze pressure [(cmH2O, mean ± SD), 5 ± 12 vs. 15 ± 15, P = 0.04] and mean change (delta) in PGI-S score [(mean ± SD), -0.2 ± 0.9 vs. -0.8 ± 0.8, P = 0.04]. Within-group analysis showed that UDI-6…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 16 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free