Urinary Incontinence, UrgeNCT02551822
Cycling Versus Continuous Mode in Neuromodulator Programming
A study testing sacral neuromodulator in people with Urinary Incontinence, Urge, run by University of New Mexico at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The investigators objective is to compare patient outcomes as changes in validated symptom measures of overactive bladder, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OABq-SF) symptom scale, between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs for their neuromodulator. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Urinary Incontinence, Urge
- What is being tested?
- sacral neuromodulator
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 32 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Jul 2012to Nov 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Women at least 21 years old or older eligible for implantation of a neuromodulator
- Women with successful Stage #1 implantation for treatment of refractory OAB
- Subjects may be enrolled in other studies as long as there are no changes to the neuromodulation device. Women may continue other OAB therapies that they are on, but as asked to not start new therapies.
- Not currently pregnant and with no plans to become pregnant during the course of the trial.
- Willing as well as mentally and physically capable of completing all study related procedures and materials
Who cannot join
- Males (we do not care for males in our urogynecology clinic)
- Incarcerated women
- Non-English speakers
- Pregnant women
- Scheduled or planned MRIs or diathermy
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
University of New Mexico Hospital
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108
University of New Mexico Health Science Center
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87131
About this study
The investigators objective is to compare patient outcomes as changes in validated symptom measures of overactive bladder, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OABq-SF) symptom scale, between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs for their neuromodulator. Specifically, the investigators propose to perform a randomized double blind crossover study in women who are successfully treated with neuromodulation to either continuous or cycling mode on the modulator and compare differences between groups on the validated OABq-SF symptom questionnaire. In addition, the investigators will compare differences in urinary frequency and pad counts between women randomized to cycling versus continuous stimulation as measured by a 3 day voiding diary. This investigation will provide evidence-based guidelines for neuromodulator programming.
Read the detailed description
Background and Significance:
The purpose of this research proposal is to evaluate the effect of cycling versus continuous neuromodulator programming on overactive bladder syndrome. s.In 1997, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved the sacral nerve stimulator as a treatment for refractory urge incontinence. Sacral Neuromodulation works via stimulation of the sacral nerve roots 2-4, (S-2, S-3 and S-4), although the exact mechanism of action is unknown. While implanted electronic stimulators have been used increasingly in the last twenty years, little investigation has documented the actual programming of the stimulator. Prospective trials examining the ideal programming parameters for a specific condition are needed to better identify optimal use of sacral nerve modulation therapy.
In brief, women with overactive bladder who are refractory to treatment are eligible for a trial placement of a neuromodulator. The modulators are placed in two stages; in stage one, a temporary lead is placed in the 3rd sacral foramen. Each neuromodulator has 4 electrodes that are placed via a single lead into the 3rd sacral foramen. The patient will generally return to clinic one week following stage 1 for a post-op evaluation. If the patient reports a 50% improvement in frequency as measured on a 3-day voiding diary, the modulator is permanently implanted. This is stage 2. After placement, the modulator is programmed in the recovery room. Patients are trialed on four set programs for their stimulator. Each program differs in electrode combination, pulse width, amplitude and rate as well as direction of current. Each of the four programs is tested with the patient to determine which is felt by the patient in the perineum and is comfortable. Finally, patients can either have their modulator set on a cycling or continuous mode. Currently, decisions regarding programming are made by whoever is assessing the patient and are not data driven.
Typically, cycling means the neuromodulator stimulation is on for 16 seconds \& off for 8 seconds. Continuous means the patient receives constant stimulation. A single retrospective study described program parameters for programming of the modulator for treatment of Over Active Bladder (OAB). It described 67 patients who had good response to neuromodulation, and determined the mean pulse width was 204 microseconds, the pulse width ranged between 120-270 microseconds; the average rate was 9 with a range of 2-20 pulses/second. The majority of women were on cycling mode. Program cycling is purported to decrease the incidence of patients reporting that their modulator is no longer working and thought to extend battery life. No other study has investigated whether or not cycling of the stimulator improves patient outcomes.
Our objective is to compare patient outcomes using in validated symptom measures of OAB between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs. Investigators propose to perform a randomized crossover study in women who are successfully treated with neuromodulation to either continuous or cycling mode and compare differences between groups on the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire. The investigators will also compare differences in urinary frequency and pad counts between women randomized to cycling versus continuous stimulation using voiding diaries.
Specific Aims and Objectives:
Aim #1: To compare OAB improvement as measured by the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form Symptom questionnaire (OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire) between women with continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #1: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report higher OAB-q SF symptom scores than women on continuous programs.
Aim #2: To compare urinary frequency as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries between women placed on continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #2: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs report less urinary frequency as measured on 3 day voiding diaries than women on continuous programming.
Aim #3: To compare pad usage between women on cycling programs versus those on continuous programs.
Hypothesis #3: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report less pad use than women on cycling programs.
Methods:The investigators will conduct a double-blinded crossover randomized controlled clinical trial. Up to 50 women will need to be recruited in order to randomize twenty-three women who are successful with the Stage 1 implant of their neuromodulator. After written consent, clinical data will be collected and questionnaires administered. After successful Stage 1 placement women will complete a 3-day voiding diary. The recording of symptoms and completion of a voiding diary are standard of care for women undergoing neuromodulation treatment. These data will be collected and recorded.
Randomization will occur after successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel not otherwise involved in patient care will assign it. Randomization assignment will be by random number table in permutated blocks of four, to ensure that equal numbers of women will be assigned to each group. Assignments will be kept in sealed opaque envelopes and will be opened in sequential order once women have undergone successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel programming the modulator after implantation will either program the modulator to continuous or cycling programs. Patients will be blinded to randomization assignment.
Prior to their 3 month visit, study subjects will complete another voiding diary. At the visit, women will complete the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire as well as the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). At this visit, women who were assigned to continuous stimulation will be switched to cycling stimulation and women who were assigned to cycling stimulation will be switched to continuous stimulation. Women again will report for clinical follow-up at six months. Women will be asked to complete their voiding diary. At this clinic visit women will once again complete the OAB-q SF symptoms questionnaire and PGI-I
Investigators obtain a written consent from qualifying patient. Patients will then be randomized to Cycling or Continuous mode at Stage II implantation.
Statistics:
Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to describe patient characteristics. The analysis of the change in OAB-q SF scores in this 2 group, 2 period (2x2) crossover design will be a repeated measures (RM) Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) with both the treatment group (cycling versus continuous) and period (first treatment versus second treatment) as repeated factors. The possibility of a cross over effect will be accounted for in the analysis by an order effect covariate (equal to 1 if cycling is first and 0 if not.) Analysis of urinary incontinence episodes and pad counts as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries will be analyzed by repeated measures Poisson regression. (Using SAS's PROC GEN MOD with a Poisson distribution) Significance is set at p = 0.05.
Power analysis: In our cross over randomized controlled trial the investigators assume that a clinically important difference between changes in OAB-q SF scores between women on continuous versus cycling stimulation, with a standard deviation of the paired differences of 15 points between groups with an alpha error of 0.05 and power of 80%, 20 women are needed to be randomized into equal groups.
(Hintze, J (2011) PASS11. NCSS, LLC< Kaysville Utah, US. www.ncss.com)(9), Assuming that 15% of women will be lost to follow-up the investigators will need to randomize 23 women to the study.
- Expected outcome: This randomized control trial will demonstrate that women on the cycling program mode will report higher OAB-q SF Symptom scores, and will report less urinary frequency and less pad usage as measured on 3-day voiding diaries.
- Conditions
- Urinary Incontinence, Urge
- Being tested
- sacral neuromodulator
- Keywords
- Urge Urinary Incontinence, sacral neuromodulation
- Medical subject headings
- Urinary Incontinence, Urge
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
sacral neuromodulatorDevice
Also called Interstim
The Implanted Pulse Generator will be set via randomization to continuous vs cycling stimulation.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Cycling | Active comparator | Sacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to on-off cycles (on 16 seconds, off 8 seconds). This means the devices are not continuously on. Rather they are on a "cycling" program. Receives: Device: sacral neuromodulator |
| Continuous | Active comparator | Sacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to be on continuously. This means the devices are continuously on. They are on a "continuous" program. Receives: Device: sacral neuromodulator |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form (OABq) Short Form Symptom Bother Scale Result
The Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) assesses symptom bother \& health-related quality of life (HRQL) for overactive bladder. The short form OAB-q SF, provides a quick assessment of symptom bother, consisting of a 6-item symptom bother scale. The questionnaire is on a 6 point scale, 1 indicates symptom is not bothersome (best outcome), 6 indicates symptom bothers the participant "a very great deal" (worst possible outcome). The majority of the participants were missing the HRQL portion of the questionnaire, so this portion of the questionnaire was not included in the analysis. These are the raw scores ranges for each question prior to being transformed. The possible scores for complete surveys range from 13 (if the participant marked "not bothersome" for all 6) to 78 (if the participant marked "a very great deal" for all 6 questions) once transformed. The reported numbers are the transformed scores [(actual raw score-lowest possible score)/possible raw score range] X 100.
Measured: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Voiding Diary: Urge Incontinence Episodes
Bladder Diaries (BD) are a useful clinical tool and one of the most common outcome measure used in studies of urinary incontinence and other forms of lower urinary tract dysfunction. The patient is asked to prospectively record the frequency, number and volume of voids and incontinence episodes. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommends diary duration of at least three days for research studies.
Measured: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Questionnaire Scale Results
The Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale is a global index that may be used to rate the response of a condition to a therapy. It is a transition scale that is a single question asking the patient to rate their urinary tract condition now, as compared with how it was prior to before beginning treatment on a 7 point scale, 1 indicating the participant's condition is "Very much better" (best possible outcome), and 7 being "Very much worse" (worst possible outcome). The answers to the 7 questions were then averaged to a score.
Measured: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2012
- Primary completionNov 2015
- Study completionNov 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Urinary Incontinence, UrgeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of New Mexico
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Yuko Komesu, University of New Mexico
- Investigators
- Yuko M Komesu, MD, Principal investigator, University of New Mexico Health Sciences CenterGwendolyn Beer, RN, Study chair, University of New Mexico Health Sciences CenterRebecca G Rogers, MD, Study director, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02551822
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 12-133
- Status last verified
- Apr 2018
- First submitted
- 9 Sep 2015
- Last updated
- 27 Apr 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Apr 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cycling Versus Continuous Mode in Neuromodulator Programming
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02551822
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 12-133
- Conditions
- Urinary Incontinence, Urge
- Keywords
- Urge Urinary Incontinence, sacral neuromodulation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of New MexicoUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates
- Study start
- Jul 2012
- Primary completion
- Nov 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 27 Apr 2018
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The investigators objective is to compare patient outcomes as changes in validated symptom measures of overactive bladder, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OABq-SF) symptom scale, between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs for their neuromodulator. Specifically, the investigators propose to perform a randomized double blind crossover study in women who are successfully treated with neuromodulation to either continuous or cycling mode on the modulator and compare differences between groups on the validated OABq-SF symptom questionnaire. In addition, the investigators will compare differences in urinary frequency and pad counts between women randomized to cycling versus continuous stimulation as measured by a 3 day voiding diary. This investigation will provide evidence-based guidelines for neuromodulator programming.
Detailed description
Background and Significance:
The purpose of this research proposal is to evaluate the effect of cycling versus continuous neuromodulator programming on overactive bladder syndrome. s.In 1997, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved the sacral nerve stimulator as a treatment for refractory urge incontinence. Sacral Neuromodulation works via stimulation of the sacral nerve roots 2-4, (S-2, S-3 and S-4), although the exact mechanism of action is unknown. While implanted electronic stimulators have been used increasingly in the last twenty years, little investigation has documented the actual programming of the stimulator. Prospective trials examining the ideal programming parameters for a specific condition are needed to better identify optimal use of sacral nerve modulation therapy.
In brief, women with overactive bladder who are refractory to treatment are eligible for a trial placement of a neuromodulator. The modulators are placed in two stages; in stage one, a temporary lead is placed in the 3rd sacral foramen. Each neuromodulator has 4 electrodes that are placed via a single lead into the 3rd sacral foramen. The patient will generally return to clinic one week following stage 1 for a post-op evaluation. If the patient reports a 50% improvement in frequency as measured on a 3-day voiding diary, the modulator is permanently implanted. This is stage 2. After placement, the modulator is programmed in the recovery room. Patients are trialed on four set programs for their stimulator. Each program differs in electrode combination, pulse width, amplitude and rate as well as direction of current. Each of the four programs is tested with the patient to determine which is felt by the patient in the perineum and is comfortable. Finally, patients can either have their modulator set on a cycling or continuous mode. Currently, decisions regarding programming are made by whoever is assessing the patient and are not data driven.
Typically, cycling means the neuromodulator stimulation is on for 16 seconds \& off for 8 seconds. Continuous means the patient receives constant stimulation. A single retrospective study described program parameters for programming of the modulator for treatment of Over Active Bladder (OAB). It described 67 patients who had good response to neuromodulation, and determined the mean pulse width was 204 microseconds, the pulse width ranged between 120-270 microseconds; the average rate was 9 with a range of 2-20 pulses/second. The majority of women were on cycling mode. Program cycling is purported to decrease the incidence of patients reporting that their modulator is no longer working and thought to extend battery life. No other study has investigated whether or not cycling of the stimulator improves patient outcomes.
Our objective is to compare patient outcomes using in validated symptom measures of OAB between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs. Investigators propose to perform a randomized crossover study in women who are successfully treated with neuromodulation to either continuous or cycling mode and compare differences between groups on the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire. The investigators will also compare differences in urinary frequency and pad counts between women randomized to cycling versus continuous stimulation using voiding diaries.
Specific Aims and Objectives:
Aim #1: To compare OAB improvement as measured by the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form Symptom questionnaire (OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire) between women with continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #1: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report higher OAB-q SF symptom scores than women on continuous programs.
Aim #2: To compare urinary frequency as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries between women placed on continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #2: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs report less urinary frequency as measured on 3 day voiding diaries than women on continuous programming.
Aim #3: To compare pad usage between women on cycling programs versus those on continuous programs.
Hypothesis #3: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report less pad use than women on cycling programs.
Methods:The investigators will conduct a double-blinded crossover randomized controlled clinical trial. Up to 50 women will need to be recruited in order to randomize twenty-three women who are successful with the Stage 1 implant of their neuromodulator. After written consent, clinical data will be collected and questionnaires administered. After successful Stage 1 placement women will complete a 3-day voiding diary. The recording of symptoms and completion of a voiding diary are standard of care for women undergoing neuromodulation treatment. These data will be collected and recorded.
Randomization will occur after successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel not otherwise involved in patient care will assign it. Randomization assignment will be by random number table in permutated blocks of four, to ensure that equal numbers of women will be assigned to each group. Assignments will be kept in sealed opaque envelopes and will be opened in sequential order once women have undergone successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel programming the modulator after implantation will either program the modulator to continuous or cycling programs. Patients will be blinded to randomization assignment.
Prior to their 3 month visit, study subjects will complete another voiding diary. At the visit, women will complete the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire as well as the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). At this visit, women who were assigned to continuous stimulation will be switched to cycling stimulation and women who were assigned to cycling stimulation will be switched to continuous stimulation. Women again will report for clinical follow-up at six months. Women will be asked to complete their voiding diary. At this clinic visit women will once again complete the OAB-q SF symptoms questionnaire and PGI-I
Investigators obtain a written consent from qualifying patient. Patients will then be randomized to Cycling or Continuous mode at Stage II implantation.
Statistics:
Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to describe patient characteristics. The analysis of the change in OAB-q SF scores in this 2 group, 2 period (2x2) crossover design will be a repeated measures (RM) Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) with both the treatment group (cycling versus continuous) and period (first treatment versus second treatment) as repeated factors. The possibility of a cross over effect will be accounted for in the analysis by an order effect covariate (equal to 1 if cycling is first and 0 if not.) Analysis of urinary incontinence episodes and pad counts as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries will be analyzed by repeated measures Poisson regression. (Using SAS's PROC GEN MOD with a Poisson distribution) Significance is set at p = 0.05.
Power analysis: In our cross over randomized controlled trial the investigators assume that a clinically important difference between changes in OAB-q SF scores between women on continuous versus cycling stimulation, with a standard deviation of the paired differences of 15 points between groups with an alpha error of 0.05 and power of 80%, 20 women are needed to be randomized into equal groups.
(Hintze, J (2011) PASS11. NCSS, LLC< Kaysville Utah, US. www.ncss.com)(9), Assuming that 15% of women will be lost to follow-up the investigators will need to randomize 23 women to the study.
- Expected outcome: This randomized control trial will demonstrate that women on the cycling program mode will report higher OAB-q SF Symptom scores, and will report less urinary frequency and less pad usage as measured on 3-day voiding diaries.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cycling | Active comparator | Device: sacral neuromodulatorSacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to on-off cycles (on 16 seconds, off 8 seconds). This means the devices are not continuously on. Rather they are on a "cycling" program. |
| Continuous | Active comparator | Device: sacral neuromodulatorSacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to be on continuously. This means the devices are continuously on. They are on a "continuous" program. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Women at least 21 years old or older eligible for implantation of a neuromodulator
- Women with successful Stage #1 implantation for treatment of refractory OAB
- Subjects may be enrolled in other studies as long as there are no changes to the neuromodulation device. Women may continue other OAB therapies that they are on, but as asked to not start new therapies.
- Not currently pregnant and with no plans to become pregnant during the course of the trial.
- Willing as well as mentally and physically capable of completing all study related procedures and materials
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Males (we do not care for males in our urogynecology clinic)
- Incarcerated women
- Non-English speakers
- Pregnant women
- Scheduled or planned MRIs or diathermy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| sacral neuromodulatorAlso: InterstimThe Implanted Pulse Generator will be set via randomization to continuous vs cycling stimulation. | Device | Continuous, Cycling |
Primary outcome
Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form (OABq) Short Form Symptom Bother Scale Result
Time frame: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
The Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) assesses symptom bother \& health-related quality of life (HRQL) for overactive bladder. The short form OAB-q SF, provides a quick assessment of symptom bother, consisting of a 6-item symptom bother scale. The questionnaire is on a 6 point scale, 1 indicates symptom is not bothersome (best outcome), 6 indicates symptom bothers the participant "a very great deal" (worst possible outcome). The majority of the participants were missing the HRQL portion of the questionnaire, so this portion of the questionnaire was not included in the analysis. These are the raw scores ranges for each question prior to being transformed. The possible scores for complete surveys range from 13 (if the participant marked "not bothersome" for all 6) to 78 (if the participant marked "a very great deal" for all 6 questions) once transformed. The reported numbers are the transformed scores [(actual raw score-lowest possible score)/possible raw score range] X 100.
2 secondary outcomes
Voiding Diary: Urge Incontinence Episodes
Time frame: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Questionnaire Scale Results
Time frame: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Apr 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Related trials for Urinary Incontinence, Urge
Active, not recruiting
APPROVE Trial: Evaluating a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for Treatment of OAB in Women
Overactive Bladder (OAB), Urinary Urgency
Active, not recruiting
INTIBIA Pivotal Study
Urinary Incontinence, Urge, Urinary Bladder, Overactive
Recruiting
Post Approval Effectiveness and Durability Evaluation of the Altaviva™ Tibial Device
Urge Urinary Incontinence
Recruiting
A Real World Study of eCoin for Urgency Urinary Incontinence: Post Approval Evaluation (RECIPE)
Overactive Bladder, Urge Incontinence
RecruitingPhase 2
Surface Electrical Stimulation for Urinary Incontinence in Men Treated for Prostate Cancer
Urinary Urge Incontinence, Stress Urinary Incontinence
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Yuko M Komesu, MD principal investigator
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
Gwendolyn Beer, RN study chair
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
Rebecca G Rogers, MD study director
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing sacral neuromodulator in people with Urinary Incontinence, Urge, run by University of New Mexico at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Apr 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 27 Apr 2018). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form (OABq) Short Form Symptom Bother Scale Result (time frame: Three months after change in program from cycling to continuous or vice versa.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Apr 2018.