Premium
The impact of a mobile application‐based treatment for urinary incontinence in adult women: Design of a mixed‐methods randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting
Author(s) -
Loohuis Anne M.M.,
Wessels Nienke J.,
Jellema Petra,
Vermeulen Karin M.,
Sliekerten Hove Marijke C.,
van GemertPijnen Julia E.W.C.,
Berger Marjolein Y.,
Dekker Janny H.,
Blanker Marco H.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
neurourology and urodynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1520-6777
pISSN - 0733-2467
DOI - 10.1002/nau.23507
Subject(s) - medicine , urinary incontinence , randomized controlled trial , quality of life (healthcare) , physical therapy , randomization , focus group , family medicine , nursing , surgery , marketing , business
Aims We aim to assess whether a purpose‐developed mobile application (app) is non‐inferior regarding effectiveness and cost‐effective when used to treat women with urinary incontinence (UI), as compared to care as usual in Dutch primary care. Additionally, we will explore the expectations and experiences of patients and care providers regarding app usage. Methods A mixed‐methods study will be performed, combining a pragmatic, randomized‐controlled, non‐inferiority trial with an extensive process evaluation. Women aged ≥18 years, suffering from UI ≥ 2 times per week and with access to a smartphone or tablet are eligible to participate. The primary outcome will be the change in UI symptom scores at 4 months after randomization, as assessed by the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire UI Short Form. Secondary outcomes will be the change in UI symptom scores at 12 months, as well as the patient‐reported global impression of improvement, quality of life, change in sexual functioning, UI episodes per day, and costs at 4 and 12 months. In parallel, we will perform an extensive process evaluation to assess the expectations and experiences of patients and care providers regarding app usage, making use of interviews, focus group sessions, and log data analysis. Conclusion This study will assess both the effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of app‐based treatment for UI. The combination with the process evaluation, which will be performed in parallel, should also give valuable insights into the contextual factors that influence the effectiveness of such a treatment.