Objective

To develop a framework that describes the most important symptom outcomes for anal incontinence treatment from the patient perspective.

Methods

A conceptual framework was developed by the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network based on four semistructured focus groups and confirmed in two sets of 10 cognitive interviews including women with anal incontinence. We explored: 1) patient-preferred terminology for describing anal incontinence symptoms; 2) patient definitions of treatment "success"; 3) importance of symptoms and outcomes in the framework; and 4) conceptual gaps (defined as outcomes not previously identified as important). Sessions were conducted according to grounded theory transcribed, coded, and qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed to identify relevant themes. Content and face validity of the framework were further assessed using cognitive interviews.

Results

Thirty-four women participated in focus groups and 20 in cognitive interviews. Overall, 29 (54%) were aged 60 years or older, 42 (78%) were white, and 10 (19%) had a high school degree or less. Two overarching outcome themes were identified: "primary bowel leakage symptoms" and "ancillary bowel symptoms." Subdomains important in primary bowel leakage symptoms included leakage characteristics (symptom frequency, amount of leakage, symptom bother) and conditions when bowel leakage occurs (predictability, awareness, urgency). Subdomains important under ancillary bowel symptoms included emptying disorders (constipation, obstructed defecation, and wiping issues) and discomfort (pain, burning). New outcomes identified included predictability, awareness, wiping issues, and discomfort.

Conclusion

Women with anal incontinence desire a wide range of symptom outcomes after treatment. These are captured in our conceptual framework, which can aid clinicians and researchers in assessing anal incontinence. LEVEL OF EVIEDENCE: II.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of Botox and anticholinergic (AC) medications for the management of urgency urinary incontinence (UUI).

Methods

Cost and effectiveness data were analyzed from participants in the Anticholinergic versus Botox Comparison randomized trial of daily AC medication versus 100 U of intradetrusor Botox injection. Societal costs included the following: treatment costs, patient costs, and medical and nonmedical utilization during the 6-month trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated based on questionnaire-derived utility measures and annualized based on data collected at baseline through 6 months. We also estimated the average direct costs for each treatment through 9 months - the duration of time when approximately half the Botox participants maintained adequate symptom control.

Results

Data were analyzed on the 231 women who completed a 6-month follow-up in the Anticholinergic versus Botox Comparison trial (119 AC and 112 Botox). The mean reduction in UUI episodes per day was not significantly different per group. The cumulative mean direct costs through the first 6 months also were similar: $1339 for the AC group and $1266 for the Botox group with AC costs exceeding Botox costs after 5 months. Both groups had considerable QALY gains. Annualizing the 6-month trial results to a 12-month measure, the AC and Botox groups averaged 0.702 and 0.707 QALYs, respectively. Estimates through 9 months favored Botox, showing that AC participants incurred a higher cost per month of adequate symptoms control ($305) compared with Botox participants ($207).

Conclusions

Botox and AC medications have similar costs and effectiveness in the first 6 months of UUI treatment. If costs and outcomes are considered through 9 months, Botox may have significantly lower costs but similar UUI symptom control as AC.

The goals of this trial are to determine the efficacy and safety of two treatments for women experiencing fecal incontinence. First, we aim to compare the use of loperamide to placebo and second, to compare the use of anal sphincter exercises with biofeedback to usual care. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in the St. Mark's (Vaizey) Score 24weeks after treatment initiation. As a Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (PFDN) trial, subjects are enrolling from eight PFDN clinical centers across the United States. A centralized data coordinating center supervises data collection and analysis. These two first-line treatments for fecal incontinence are being investigated simultaneously using a two-by-two randomized factorial design: a medication intervention (loperamide versus placebo) and a pelvic floor strength and sensory training intervention (anal sphincter exercises with manometry-assisted biofeedback versus usual care using an educational pamphlet). Interventionists providing the anal sphincter exercise training with biofeedback have received standardized training and assessment. Symptom severity, diary, standardized anorectal manometry and health-related quality of life outcomes are assessed using validated instruments administered by researchers masked to randomized interventions. Cost effectiveness analyses will be performed using prospectively collected data on care costs and resource utilization. This article describes the rationale and design of this randomized trial, focusing on specific research concepts of interest to researchers in the field of female pelvic floor disorders and all other providers who care for patients with fecal incontinence.

Objective

To develop statistical models predicting recurrent pelvic organ prolapse, surgical complications, and change in health status 12 months after apical prolapse surgery.

Methods

Logistic regression models were developed using a combined cohort from three randomized trials and two prospective cohort studies from 1,301 participants enrolled in surgical studies conducted by the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Composite recurrent prolapse was defined as prolapse beyond the hymen; the presence of bothersome bulge symptoms; or prolapse reoperation or retreatment within 12 months after surgery. Complications were defined as any serious adverse event or Dindo grade III complication within 12 months of surgery. Significant change in health status was defined as a minimum important change of SF-6D utility score (±0.035 points) from baseline. Thirty-two candidate risk factors were considered for each model and model accuracy was measured using concordance indices. All indices were internally validated using 1,000 bootstrap resamples to correct for bias.

Results

The models accurately predicted composite recurrent prolapse (concordance index=0.72, 95% CI 0.69-0.76), bothersome vaginal bulge (concordance index=0.73, 95% CI 0.68-0.77), prolapse beyond the hymen (concordance index=0.74, 95% CI 0.70-0.77), serious adverse event (concordance index=0.60, 95% CI 0.56-0.64), Dindo grade III or greater complication (concordance index=0.62, 95% CI 0.58-0.66), and health status improvement (concordance index=0.64, 95% CI 0.62-0.67) or worsening (concordance index=0.63, 95% CI 0.60-0.67). Calibration curves demonstrated all models were accurate through clinically useful predicted probabilities.

Conclusion

These prediction models are able to provide accurate and discriminating estimates of prolapse recurrence, complications, and health status 12 months after prolapse surgery.

Importance

More than 300,000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) are commonly performed transvaginal surgeries to correct apical prolapse. Little is known about their comparative efficacy and safety, and it is unknown whether perioperative behavioral therapy with pelvic floor muscle training (BPMT) improves outcomes of prolapse surgery.

Objective

To compare outcomes between (1) SSLF and ULS and (2) perioperative BPMT and usual care in women undergoing surgery for vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence.

Design, setting, and participants

Multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized trial of 374 women undergoing surgery to treat both apical vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence was conducted between 2008 and 2013 at 9 US medical centers. Two-year follow-up rate was 84.5%.

Interventions

The surgical intervention was transvaginal surgery including midurethral sling with randomization to SSLF (n = 186) or ULS (n = 188); the behavioral intervention was randomization to receive perioperative BPMT (n = 186) or usual care (n = 188).

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome for the surgical intervention (surgical success) was defined as (1) no apical descent greater than one-third into vaginal canal or anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen (anatomic success), (2) no bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms, and (3) no re-treatment for prolapse at 2 years. For the behavioral intervention, primary outcome at 6 months was urinary symptom scores (Urinary Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse), and primary outcomes at 2 years were prolapse symptom scores (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse) and anatomic success.

Results

At 2 years, surgical group was not significantly associated with surgical success rates (ULS, 59.2% [93/157] vs SSLF, 60.5% [92/152]; unadjusted difference, -1.3%; 95% CI, -12.2% to 9.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5) or serious adverse event rates (ULS, 16.5% [31/188] vs SSLF, 16.7% [31/186]; unadjusted difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -7.7% to 7.4%; adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.6). Perioperative BPMT was not associated with greater improvements in urinary scores at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference, -6.7; 95% CI, -19.7 to 6.2), prolapse scores at 24 months (adjusted treatment difference, -8.0; 95% CI, -22.1 to 6.1), or anatomic success at 24 months.

Conclusions and relevance

Two years after vaginal surgery for prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, neither ULS nor SSLF was significantly superior to the other for anatomic, functional, or adverse event outcomes. Perioperative BPMT did not improve urinary symptoms at 6 months or prolapse outcomes at 2 years.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00597935.