University of Surrey

Test tubes in the lab Research in the ATI Dance Research

A trial of devices for urinary incontinence after treatment for prostate cancer

Macaulay, M, Broadbridge, J, Gage, Heather, Williams, P, Birch, B, Moore, KN, Cottenden, A and Fader, MJ (2015) A trial of devices for urinary incontinence after treatment for prostate cancer BJU INTERNATIONAL, 116 (3). pp. 432-442.

14. bju13016 accepted article before proof reading.pdf - Accepted version Manuscript
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (996kB) | Preview
Text (licence)
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (33kB) | Preview


Objective To compare the performance of three continence management devices and absorbent pads used by men with persistent urinary incontinence (>1 year) after treatment for prostate cancer. Patients and Methods Randomised, controlled trial of 56 men with 1-year follow-up. Three devices were tested for 3 weeks each: sheath drainage system, body-worn urinal (BWU) and penile clamp. Device and pad performance were assessed. Quality of life (QoL) was measured at baseline and follow-up with the King's Health Questionnaire. Stated (intended use) and revealed (actual use) preference for products were assessed. Value-for-money was gathered. Results Substantial and significant differences in performance were found. The sheath was rated as ‘good’ for extended use (e.g. golf and travel) when pad changing is difficult; for keeping skin dry, not leaking, not smelling and convenient for storage and travel. The BWU was generally rated worse than the sheath and was mainly used for similar activities but by men who could not use a sheath (e.g. retracted penis) and was not good for seated activities. The clamp was good for short vigorous activities like swimming/exercise; it was the most secure, least likely to leak, most discreet but almost all men described it as uncomfortable or painful. The pads were good for everyday activities and best for night-time use; most easy to use, comfortable when dry but most likely to leak and most uncomfortable when wet. There was a preference for having a mixture of products to meet daytime needs; around two-thirds of men were using a combination of pads and devices after testing compared with baseline. Conclusions This is the first trial to systematically compare different continence management devices for men. Pads and devices have different strengths, which make them particularly suited to certain circumstances and activities. Most men prefer to use pads at night but would choose a mixture of pads and devices during the day. Device limitations were important but may be overcome by better design.

Item Type: Article
Subjects : Economics
Divisions : Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences > School of Economics
Authors :
Macaulay, M
Broadbridge, J
Williams, P
Birch, B
Moore, KN
Cottenden, A
Fader, MJ
Date : 1 September 2015
DOI : 10.1111/bju.13016
Copyright Disclaimer : This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Macaulay, M., Broadbridge, J., Gage, H., Williams, P., Birch, B., Moore, K. N., Cottenden, A. and Fader, M. J. (2015), A trial of devices for urinary incontinence after treatment for prostate cancer. BJU Int, 116: 432–442. doi:10.1111/bju.13016, which has been published in final form at This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
Uncontrolled Keywords : Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Urology & Nephrology, penile compression device, body-worn urinal, sheath drainage system, King's Health Questionnaire, quality of life, QUALITY-OF-LIFE, RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY, QUESTIONNAIRE, SATISFACTION, CROSSOVER
Related URLs :
Depositing User : Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited : 10 Aug 2016 13:14
Last Modified : 31 Jul 2018 16:33

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item


Downloads per month over past year

Information about this web site

© The University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, United Kingdom.
+44 (0)1483 300800