Refractory Overactive BladderEstimNCT01525485
Vaginal Electrical Stimulation Versus Neuromodulation
An observational study of Refractory Overactive Bladder, run by University of Oklahoma at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This prospective study compares quality of life measures of patients with refractory overactive bladder, between two modes of neuromodulation: vaginal electrical stimulation (Group A) and sacral nerve stimulation (Group B). The specific aims are: 1. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 to 99 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Refractory Overactive Bladder
- How many people
- 34 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Mar 2011to Apr 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 to 99 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: The projected sample size is 48 patients. We anticipate the recruitment of 16 patients for the InterStim arm of this study and 32 patients who will undergo vaginal electrical stimulation. Participants will be drawn from the University of Oklahoma Urogynecology clinics. Our catchment area includes OU Physicians clinic (private clinic) and Presbyterian Professional Building (resident clinic). Our referral area includes all of Oklahoma as well as the surrounding states. Participants will be recruited by physician referrals as well as by campus advertisements.
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosis of refractory OAB (+/- UUI)*
- Female Gender
- Eligible for both treatment interventions
- Available for 8 weeks of follow-up
- Able to complete study assessments
- Must discontinue anticholinergics within 2 weeks of intervention
Who cannot join
- Age < 21
- Pregnancy
- Stage 3 or 4 pelvic organ prolapse
- Current use of anticholinergics
- Urinary tract infection
- Undergoing concurrent treatment for pelvic organ prolapse
Show all 11Show fewer
- Unstable or serious cardiac arrhythmia
- Implanted pacemaker
- Postvoid residual > 100ml
- Unstable seizure disorder
- Dementia or inability to follow instructions
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73104
About this study
Official title: Vaginal Electrical Stimulation Versus Sacral Neuromodulation for the Treatment of Refractory Overactive Bladder: A Pilot Study
This prospective study compares quality of life measures of patients with refractory overactive bladder, between two modes of neuromodulation: vaginal electrical stimulation (Group A) and sacral nerve stimulation (Group B).
The specific aims are:
- To characterize patient symptom bother score, quality of life, and body image scores in patients obtaining sacral nerve stimulation, as compared to vaginal electrical stimulation.
- Hypothesis 1: Both modes of neuromodulation will impact patients' scores in quality of life, patient symptoms, and body image questionnaires.
Read the detailed description
All participants will have a standardized intake history which will include age, weight, history of prior treatment for incontinence, medication list, obstetric and gynecologic history, medical history, and surgical history, as well as a complete review of systems. The physical examination will include vital signs (including BMI), genitourinary exam, including Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POPQ), and neurologic exam. All patients will undergo spontaneous uroflowmetry, urine dipstick from catheterized specimen, multichannel urodynamics, and 3-day voiding diary. Measurement of post-void residual will also be obtained. Completion of the UDI-69, King's Health Questionnaire10, and the Modified Body Image Perception Scale (MBIS) will also be part of the initial visit 11,12.
All participants taking anticholinergics will undergo a 2 week flush-out period prior to the intake assessment. After the intake assessment, the provider will determine which treatment option is appropriate to the participant, and they will then be assigned to one of the two treatment arms: Group A will use vaginal electrical stimulation using the Empi Intravaginal Stimulation Unit Minnova (Empi, St. Paul, MN, USA) and participants in Group B will receive sacral neuromodulation using InterStim (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA).
- Conditions
- Refractory Overactive Bladder
- Medical subject headings
- Urinary Bladder, Overactive
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Electrical Stimulation | Participants will have a dedicated visit with a pelvic floor physical therapist during which instructions on usage and technique for the Minnova unit will be given. The electrical parameters selected will be: 10 Hertz frequency, 5-second on/10=second off cycle, and a pulse width of 0.4 milliseconds. The bipolar square will be delivered over a range that varies from 0 to 100 milliamps, depending on the maximum current intensity comfortably tolerated by the patient. The participant will perform each treatment session for 20 minutes twice daily for 8 weeks. Participants will be asked to keep a log recording the dates, times, and duration of each treatment session. | |
| Interstim device | Participants assigned to the sacral neuromodulation group will undergo InterStim device placement by one of the three Urogynecologists at OUHSC using a staged implant technique according to manufacturer's specifications. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Symptom improvement
>50% improvement in symptoms and decrease in frequency of voids and episodes of nocturia. Subjective outcomes will be measured by improvement in scores on the UDI-6, KHG, and MBIS.
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Feb 2012 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2011
- Primary completionApr 2016
- Study completionApr 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Refractory Overactive BladderStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 34 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Oklahoma
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- S. Abbas Shobeiri, MD, Principal investigator, Univerisity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01525485
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1104
- Acronym
- Estim
- Status last verified
- Jun 2016
- First submitted
- 19 Jan 2012
- Last updated
- 9 Jun 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Jun 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Vaginal Electrical Stimulation Versus Sacral Neuromodulation for the Treatment of Refractory Overactive Bladder: A Pilot Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01525485
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Estim / 1104
- Conditions
- Refractory Overactive Bladder
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 34 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of OklahomaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2011
- Primary completion
- Apr 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Feb 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This prospective study compares quality of life measures of patients with refractory overactive bladder, between two modes of neuromodulation: vaginal electrical stimulation (Group A) and sacral nerve stimulation (Group B).
The specific aims are:
- To characterize patient symptom bother score, quality of life, and body image scores in patients obtaining sacral nerve stimulation, as compared to vaginal electrical stimulation.
- Hypothesis 1: Both modes of neuromodulation will impact patients' scores in quality of life, patient symptoms, and body image questionnaires.
Detailed description
All participants will have a standardized intake history which will include age, weight, history of prior treatment for incontinence, medication list, obstetric and gynecologic history, medical history, and surgical history, as well as a complete review of systems. The physical examination will include vital signs (including BMI), genitourinary exam, including Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POPQ), and neurologic exam. All patients will undergo spontaneous uroflowmetry, urine dipstick from catheterized specimen, multichannel urodynamics, and 3-day voiding diary. Measurement of post-void residual will also be obtained. Completion of the UDI-69, King's Health Questionnaire10, and the Modified Body Image Perception Scale (MBIS) will also be part of the initial visit 11,12.
All participants taking anticholinergics will undergo a 2 week flush-out period prior to the intake assessment. After the intake assessment, the provider will determine which treatment option is appropriate to the participant, and they will then be assigned to one of the two treatment arms: Group A will use vaginal electrical stimulation using the Empi Intravaginal Stimulation Unit Minnova (Empi, St. Paul, MN, USA) and participants in Group B will receive sacral neuromodulation using InterStim (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA).
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Electrical Stimulation | – | –Participants will have a dedicated visit with a pelvic floor physical therapist during which instructions on usage and technique for the Minnova unit will be given. The electrical parameters selected will be: 10 Hertz frequency, 5-second on/10=second off cycle, and a pulse width of 0.4 milliseconds. The bipolar square will be delivered over a range that varies from 0 to 100 milliamps, depending on the maximum current intensity comfortably tolerated by the patient. The participant will perform each treatment session for 20 minutes twice daily for 8 weeks. Participants will be asked to keep a log recording the dates, times, and duration of each treatment session. |
| Interstim device | – | –Participants assigned to the sacral neuromodulation group will undergo InterStim device placement by one of the three Urogynecologists at OUHSC using a staged implant technique according to manufacturer's specifications. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 to 99 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The projected sample size is 48 patients. We anticipate the recruitment of 16 patients for the InterStim arm of this study and 32 patients who will undergo vaginal electrical stimulation. Participants will be drawn from the University of Oklahoma Urogynecology clinics. Our catchment area includes OU Physicians clinic (private clinic) and Presbyterian Professional Building (resident clinic). Our referral area includes all of Oklahoma as well as the surrounding states. Participants will be recruited by physician referrals as well as by campus advertisements.
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Diagnosis of refractory OAB (+/- UUI)*
- Female Gender
- Eligible for both treatment interventions
- Available for 8 weeks of follow-up
- Able to complete study assessments
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Age < 21
- Pregnancy
- Stage 3 or 4 pelvic organ prolapse
- Current use of anticholinergics
- Urinary tract infection
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Symptom improvement
Time frame: 3 months
>50% improvement in symptoms and decrease in frequency of voids and episodes of nocturia. Subjective outcomes will be measured by improvement in scores on the UDI-6, KHG, and MBIS.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Jun 2016.
Related trials for Refractory Overactive Bladder
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Autologous Platelet Concentrate Bladder Injection for Refractory Overactive Bladder
Over Active Bladder
Recruiting
Cefar URO - Symptomatic Treatment of Overactive Bladder
Overactive Bladder (OAB), Refractory Overactive Bladder
Recruiting
Electroacupuncture as a Treatment for Refractory Overactive Bladder
Over Active Bladder, Urinary Incontinence (UI)
Not yet recruiting
Low-Intensity Shock Wave Therapy for Refractory Overactive Bladder in Women
Urinary Bladder, Overactive
Active, not recruiting
Comparative Efficacy and Safety if Intravesical Botulinum Toxin A Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Management of Refractory Overactive Bladder : A 2 Year Study
Overactive Bladder
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.
S. Abbas Shobeiri, MD principal investigator
Univerisity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Refractory Overactive Bladder, run by University of Oklahoma at 1 site 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 6 inclusion and 11 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 9 Jun 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Symptom improvement (time frame: 3 months). 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 9 Jun 2016.