Search

Objective: To determine whether electronic bladder diaries are associated with a larger placebo effect than paper diaries in studies of overactive bladder (OAB). To identify any other factors in study design that may influence the placebo effect., Study Design: This is a secondary analysis of a previous systematic review and network meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of mirabegron. Each study was analysed and placebo response rate (PRR) was calculated. Statistical analysis was used to look for associations with different factors and PRR., Results: The PRR was considerable in the studies analysed (10.5 % when calculated for change in number of micturitions over 24 h and 41.2 % for change in urgency urinary incontinence episodes over 24 h). Paper bladder diaries were associated with a significantly larger placebo response rate than electronic (10.76 % vs 10.22 %), although this may be clinically small. The size of study had a moderate positive correlation with PRR. Length of bladder diary was not associated with increased PRR., Conclusions: The PRR in studies of OAB is varied and significant. It is clear that it can be affected by factors in study design including type of bladder diary. When designing clinical studies this should be borne in mind. Equally, when attempting to optimise patient care, the benefit of the therapeutic encounter should be remembered., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Overactive bladder syndrome is defined as urinary urgency, usually accompanied by frequency and nocturia, with or without urgency urinary incontinence in the absence of urinary tract infection or another obvious pathological condition. Electronic questionnaires have been used in a few specialties with the hope of improving treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction. However, they have not been widely used in the urological field. When treating overactive bladder, the main outcome is to improve patient quality of life. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether electronic questionnaires would be equally accepted as or preferred to paper questionnaires. The secondary objective was to look at the preference in relation to patient age, education and iPad® tablet familiarity., Materials and Methods: We prospectively evaluated the iList® electronic questionnaire application using a friendly iPad tablet in patients with overactive bladder who presented to the urology clinic at our institution. Each of the 80 patients who were recruited randomly completed the validated OABSS (Overactive Bladder Symptom Score) and the PPBC (Patient Perception of Bladder Condition) questionnaires in paper and electronic format on the tablet. Variables potentially associated with the outcomes of interest included demographic data, questionnaire method preference, patient response rate and iPad familiarity. We used the 2-sided Z-test to determine whether the proportion of patients who considered the tablet to be the same, better or much better than paper was significantly greater than 50%. The 2-sided chi-square test was applied to assess whether the intervention effect significantly differed among the demographic subgroups., Results: A total of 80 patients 21 to 87 years old were enrolled in the study from November 2015 to August 2016. Of the patients 53% were female and 49% were 65 years or younger. The incidence of those who considered the tablet to be the same or better than paper was 82.5% (95% CI 74.2-90.8, p <0.001). The incidence of patients who considered the tablet to be the same or better than paper ranged from 76% to 97% regardless of age, gender and education subgroup as well as in those with any familiarity with the tablet (each p <0.001). Of the 20 patients who were not familiar with the tablet 45% preferred the electronic questionnaire (p = 0.654)., Conclusions: We found that the proportion of patients who considered electronic questionnaires to be equivalent to or better than paper versions was higher than those who preferred paper questionnaires regardless of age, gender or education level., (Copyright © 2018 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)