Open AccessTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and solifenacin succinate versus solifenacin succinate alone for treatment of overactive bladder syndrome: A double-blind randomized controlled study
Author(s) -
Yumeng Zhang,
Shaoyong Wang,
Shulu Zu,
Chanjuan Zhang
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0253040
Subject(s) - solifenacin , overactive bladder , medicine , urinary urgency , urology , transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation , constipation , alternative medicine , pathology
Objective We evaluated a combination of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and solifenacin succinate versus solifenacin alone in the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB). Methods Ninety-seven female outpatients with OAB were screened for this double-blind randomized controlled study. Eighty-six patients who met our inclusion criteria were divided randomly into two groups. In group A (43 patients), patients received oral solifenacin and “fake” TENS on the foot; in group B (43 patients), patients received oral solifenacin and effective TENS on the foot. Improvements in OAB symptoms were assessed by Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS), Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q), voiding diaries and urodynamic tests. 70 of 86 patients (36 in group A, 34 in group B) completed the 2 months of treatment and 3 months of follow-up. Results Statistically, the maximum bladder volume and OAB symptoms of both groups improved significantly after treatment. The improvement in group B was significantly better than that in group A, as indicated by the maximum bladder volume, OAB-q score and voiding diary. Some mild adverse effects were observed, including dry mouth, stomach upset, constipation, muscle pain and local paresthesia. Conclusion The combination of TENS and solifenacin was more effective in improving OAB symptoms than solifenacin alone.