http://informahealthcare.com/jmt
ISSN: 0309-1902 (print), 1464-522X (electronic)
J Med Eng Technol, 2015; 39(7): 434–440
! 2015 Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1088088
INVITED REVIEW
Recent developments in technology for the assessment and
management of incontinence
Christopher J. Hillary*1,2, Martin Slovak2,3, Avril McCarthy2,3, Hashim Hashim4 and Christopher R. Chapple1,2
1
Department of Urology, 2NIHR Devices for Dignity Healthcare Technology Co-operative, 3Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, Sheffield
Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2JF, and 4Bristol Urological Institute,
Southmead Hospital, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK
Abstract
Keywords
Urinary incontinence, the leakage of urine, is a common condition, which can have a significant
impact on a patient’s quality-of-life. Incontinence may arise as a consequence of a weakness
of the urinary sphincter or bladder dysfunction, usually over-activity. Incontinence therapies
occupy a large proportion of the healthcare budget. As no single device to manage
incontinence is appropriate for all situations, a diverse range of products are available on the
market and the development of improved products based on fundamental designs has been
slow. This review highlights some of the key issues of continence care and describes the current
technology and recent developments involved in the diagnosis, assessment and treatment
of incontinence, along with the strengths and limitations of these methods. These issues are
imperative to address if improved technology is to be developed.
Catheter, continence management, devices
for dignity, incontinence, stress urinary
incontinence, tissue engineering
1. Introduction
Urinary incontinence, the leakage of urine, is a common
condition and is set to become an increasing healthcare
problem with a greater ageing population. Incontinence can
have a significant impact on a patient’s physical, social and
psychological wellbeing, and it is estimated that between
17–40% of both male and female patients collectively suffer
from urinary incontinence, with the elderly being more
frequently affected [1].
Urinary incontinence is defined by the International
Continence Society as ‘the complaint of any involuntary
loss of urine’ [2] and can result from a variety of mechanisms
in both males and females (Figure 1). Incontinence more
frequently affects the elderly and, in post-menopausal and
multi-parous females is commonly due to stress urinary
incontinence (SUI), which is defined as the ‘involuntary
leakage of urine that occurs on effort or exertion’ [2].
Incontinence may occur in the context of the overactive
bladder symptom complex (OAB), which is a bladder storage
problem encompassing the symptoms of urinary frequency,
nocturia (waking up at night to void), urinary urgency and/or
urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). Mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) is a combination of both SUI and UUI.
Urinary incontinence affecting males can occur in association with voiding lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), for
example hesitancy to void and poor urinary flow, which is
*Corresponding author. Email: c.hillary@sheffield.ac.uk
History
Received 8 February 2015
Revised 5 May 2015
Accepted 6 May 2015
often seen in the context of benign enlargement of the prostate
(BPE), leading to bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). SUI in
males is less common than females and can occur following
prostate operations both for benign or malignant disease.
Diagnosis of the cause of both storage symptoms and
incontinence is important in order to direct specific therapies.
Following an initial assessment of symptoms and a detailed
clinical examination, important initial investigations include
checking the urine to exclude infection and the presence of
white or red cells and the use of a bladder diary or frequency/
volume chart. Additional investigations include pad weight
testing, which provides an objective measurement of leakage;
and invasive measurements, such as pressure-flow studies
(urodynamic assessment). Urodynamics can identify involuntary bladder contractions associated with over-activity; demonstrate SUI during straining and can provide information on
the function of the urinary sphincter.
Urinary incontinence is commonly associated with significant impairment of quality-of-life in studies [3]. The
management of this problem and associated symptomatic
disorders such as OAB was responsible for 1.1% of the NHS
healthcare budget and an estimated annual cost the NHS of
£536 million in 2004 [4]. Patients have often undergone a
multitude of treatment modalities, including medical and/or
surgical management, and may suffer side-effects as a result
of such therapies.
Whilst there are advancements in the field of pharmacotherapy, clearly there is a need for improved diagnostic,
monitoring and treatment strategies for incontinent patients.
DOI: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1088088
Assessment and management of incontinence
435
3. Recent advances in alternative treatment
pathways
Figure 1. Common types of urinary incontinence by gender.
They are often elderly and are frequently either unwilling or
too unfit to undergo invasive intervention and suffer sideeffects with medications often related to interaction with
co-existing medication.
Urgency urinary incontinence (UUI), which is the leakage of
urine that is preceded by urgency, can occur in the context of
OAB or neurological disorders. Behavioural therapies, such
as bladder training (which is facilitated by the use of a bladder
diary), are offered as a first-line treatment, followed by antimuscarinic drug therapy. However, many patients suffer from
side-effects using these medications and more recently a betathree agonist with fewer side-effects has been introduced.
Consequently, the investigation of other minimally invasive
treatments, such as using electrical stimulation therapy, has
been advocated [8]. The most commonly used technique
involves electrical stimulation of the posterior tibial nerve. A
commercially available device, Urgent PC, uses stimulation
of the posterior tibial nerve (PTNS) at the ankle using
electrodes; however, this technique is invasive and requires
regular patient clinic visits, which may be impractical for
those who live long distances from the clinic [9]. There are
limited randomized controlled data in the literature to confirm
long-term efficacy for this therapy beyond 3 months [10].
The technique can be effective in 55% of patients [10],
but involves weekly attendance at a clinic and, therefore,
inevitably is associated with significant cost.
The Devices for Dignity healthcare technology
co-operative (http://www.devicesfordignity.org.uk) is investigating the possibility of self-administering the treatment
of PTNS by the patient at home using a non-invasive and
lower-cost approach through self-adhesive conducting pads.
2. Recent advances in incontinence diagnosis
4. Recent advances in incontinence surgery
The diagnosis of a particular cause for urinary incontinence is
essential to allow appropriate management to be offered to a
patient. It is important not only to define the clinical problem
and for the clinician to assess the response to the treatment,
but also to provide a degree of ‘biofeedback’ to the patient
based on their response to therapy. The most objective tool to
achieve this aim is a frequency–volume chart (or bladder
diary), which enables the quantification of volume of urine
voided, urinary frequency, leakage, degree of nocturia and
whether a patient produces an increased proportion of the
24-h urinary output at night (nocturnal polyuria), which is a
separate clinical entity. Despite this, only a minority of
patients who present with incontinence are routinely assessed
using this tool [5]. This is likely to be due to the timeconsuming interpretation of paper versions of a bladder diary
during often time-limited clinical assessments and lack of
knowledge about the importance of this assessment and its
accurate interpretation in non-specialized hands in both
primary and secondary care. Furthermore, the data are often
incompletely or inadequately completed by the patient. Initial
data from the development of a standardized diary has
recently been published [6] and electronic versions of the
bladder diary are available, even in the form of ‘apps’ on
smart phones, which may encourage patients to complete
these assessments more accurately [7]. Despite these
advances, however, electronic versions of the diary present
inherent challenges, such as training and mechanical issues
and the benefits of these devices are yet to be fully evaluated.
As SUI is associated with a degree of pelvic floor weakness,
supervised pelvic floor exercises (PFE) for at least 3 months
are recommended as a first-line treatment option for patients
affected by SUI. However, poor compliance and an inability
to do the exercises has led to the development of several
electrical stimulation devices that use vaginal probes for
administration. Large-scale use of these devices is limited due
to patient discomfort, whereas recent products that rely upon
the use of electrical stimulation through a disposable intravaginal device have been developed [11] and investigators
report improved compliance and effectiveness. The evidence
base relating to the therapeutic efficacy of electrical stimulation does not justify its use in the treatment of SUI as a
direct therapeutic modality, although it is often useful in
demonstrating specific muscle groups when educating
patients about the use of exercises. Motivational tools such
as the ‘squeezy app’ have successfully been designed in order
to improve the compliance of patients performing pelvic floor
exercises [12]. Unfortunately, however, the evidence base for
such devices is also lacking in the literature.
Following the failure to respond to physiotherapy, current
surgical treatment of SUI largely relies upon either the use of
a vaginally implanted sling formed of autologous fascia
(AFS), harvested from patient’s own tissues or synthetic nonbiodegradable polypropylene mesh. Alternatively, vaginal
plication or abdominal surgery is usually reserved for cases
where there is a significant degree of pelvic organ prolapse.
While AFS is associated with high success rates, there is more
436
C. J. Hillary et al.
potential morbidity and a longer recovery phase, leading to
the more widespread use of polypropylene mesh as a repair
material.
Following an escalation in the number of complications
reported to the US Manufacturer and User Facility Device
Experience (MAUDE) database in 2008, the US Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) began to issue notifications to
inform patients of the risks associated with the ‘kits’ used for
SUI surgery and the mesh implants themselves. Current
reports of mesh related complications are likely to underestimate the true extent of the long-term complication rate,
since erosions of this synthetic material can take years to
occur and the surgical follow-up is short in many publications,
which often assess a limited number of patients.
Mesh erosion and exposure, where the material extrudes
through the patient’s tissues, has been reported to occur in
4% of patients undergoing a transvaginal tape (TVT)
procedure for SUI [13]. This complication often requires
mesh removal and significant debility can occur as a result of
this [14]. In recognition of this growing problem, patient
groups have begun to arrange websites and online forums, for
example, http://www.tvt-messed-up-mesh.org.uk.
Recent technological advances in the field of tissue
engineering and the development of new materials have led
to the investigation of degradable synthetic materials in order
to produce remodelling of the pelvic floor tissues without the
development of a chronic inflammatory response and the
persistence of a strong and rigid implanted material. The FDA
approved biodegradable polymer, poly-L-lactic acid has been
shown to have desirable mechanical properties for use in
pelvic floor reconstruction and also supports cell proliferation
in vitro [15] and demonstrates cellular infiltration following
acute implantation in rabbit models [16]. Such materials do
show some promise for use as an alternative support material;
however, experimental results are currently at an early stage
and are not yet available from clinical studies.
There has previously been interest in the use of regenerative
medicine-based approaches for the treatment of SUI, with
sphincteric cell injection therapies for the treatment of
intrinsic sphincter deficiency. These techniques can potentially be performed under a local anaesthetic as a day case
procedure. Carr et al. [17] reported the results of injecting
muscle-derived stem cells (MDSC) peri-urethrally in eight
women, five of whom symptomatically improved following
injection without any adverse events reported. The effects of
such therapies in the long-term, however, are poorly sustained.
The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been used to
treat severe SUI in both females with intrinsic sphincter
deficiency and SUI in males resulting from prostate surgery.
The AUS has been used for over 40 years with only minor
changes to the original design of the implant, which consists
of an inflatable cuff implanted to surround the bulbar urethra,
a reservoir and control pump (AMS800TM American
Medical Systems, Minnetonka, MN). In a recent systematic
review including 17 studies of AUS implantation in women
with SUI, Chartier-Kastler et al. [18] revealed overall
continence rates of between 64–100%, with rates of infection
between 0–46% and erosion experienced in between 0–67% of
patients. This wide range of complications is likely to be
related to patient selection, in particular if these were primary
J Med Eng Technol, 2015; 39(7): 434–440
or re-operative cases and other factors such as the expertise of
the surgical team. For male SUI, a recent systematic review
has demonstrated infection/erosion rates with the AUS of
8.5% and mechanical failure occurring in an average of 6.2%
of patients [19]. More recently, male slings have been
introduced, which are offered as an alternative to the AUS
and are claimed to be safe and effective. However, their longterm outcomes are unclear [20] and the risk of urinary
retention means that some patients would be required to
intermittently self-catheterize to empty the bladder on a longterm basis. There have been recent reports of exposure of the
mesh in men requiring urethroplasty following removal of the
mesh, which would also add to the overall costs.
5. Recent advances in incontinence management
Whilst awaiting definitive therapy as well as in patients who
have declined more invasive therapy or where there is a
failure of therapy or where for whatever reason it is not
possible, several devices are available. These aim to improve
patient confidence, comfort and reduce complications. Pads
or liners are generally used for patients with light-to-moderate
leakage, whereas catheters are used for severe incontinence or
in those with significant mobility issues to divert urine away
from areas of pressure sores. Other non-invasive methods of
continence management, including external urethral collection devices such as penile sheaths in male patients are useful
for patients with severe incontinence but who have sufficient
dexterity to operate them, while toileting aids, such as urinals
and collectors, can be used for patients with UUI who
struggle to reach the toilet without leaking.
5.1. Absorbent products
These devices are essential for many patients with incontinence to enable them to confidently carry out routine activities
of daily living. Advances in material design have led to a
variety of superabsorbent polymers in order to increase
absorbency and reduce material bulk. Recently, pull-ups and
T-shape diapers have been introduced in order to facilitate ease
of change, whilst maintaining dignity. Products are generally
available as disposable or reusable and clinical trials
have demonstrated that women in the community with
moderate-to-heavy leakage prefer the disposable pull-up
variety over other designs [21]. Reusable devices have high
initial costs; however, are cheaper than disposable varieties
over time and perform well in patients with light incontinence.
Incontinence associated dermatitis is an issue for pad
wearers due to persistent exposure to moisture and the urea in
urine. A device that has an absorbent anterior portion that
prevents the backflow of urine to the perineum has been
developed, which demonstrates significant improvements in
rates of incontinence associated dermatitis as compared to
standard absorbent products (43.3% vs 13.3% subjective
improvements for modified devices and standard pads,
respectively) [22].
5.2. Female devices
For female patients with SUI, there has been interest in the
use of mechanical devices that aim to restore the position of
DOI: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1088088
the proximal urethra to above the level of the pelvic floor.
This improves the transmission of pressure to the proximal
urethra and allows it to close. These intra-vaginal devices
include tampons and pessaries, which may already be familiar
to patients. A recent design demonstrated by Ziv et al. [23]
utilizes a design, which specifically aims to provide support
to the urethra, while being composed of a flexible material
that allows the passage of natural vaginal secretions. Urethral
plugs, which aim to simply block the leakage of urine from
the urethral meatus, have been described but are uncomfortable and in the long-term injure the urethra [24]. Recent
systematic reviews have suggested that the simplest and
most familiar devices to women, tampons (albeit those
designed for continence), are as effective as more formal
mechanical devices [25]. Furthermore, they are disposable
and relatively cheap.
5.3. Male devices
Condom sheaths allow the continuous channelling of urine
into a suitable collecting bag. They are particularly useful for
wheelchair users who experience moderate-to-severe urinary
incontinence and wish to avoid using a pad or catheter.
Previously, sheaths were made of latex and were secured to
the penile skin using adhesive tapes or fixation devices. There
are reports of such fixation devices leading to ischaemia and
gangrene of the glans penis [26]. Newer sheaths with an
integral adhesive obviate the need for such tapes and latex has
since been largely replaced by silicone materials.
Complications such as skin ulceration and urinary tract
infection (UTI) are well documented, albeit less so than in
association with indwelling catheters.
Self-adhesive sheaths are generally well tolerated [27] and
those that are strongly adhesive to the penile skin result in
fewer reported leakages, despite being difficult to remove,
whereas the opposite is true of weakly adhesive sheaths.
Penile compression devices have been available for
decades; however, because they are often uncomfortable and
can injure the penis and urethra [28], these were replaced by
the AUS and male sling, which demonstrate high success
rates [29]. Recently, however, there has been renewed interest
in these devices and studies have found that the penile
compression device, DribblestopÔ (Rennich Industries, Ltd.,
Calgary, Canada), is easy to use, safe and results in significant
improvements in incontinence episodes [30]. However,
appropriate assessment of the patient is important before
using penile clamps because, in high pressure, poorly
compliant bladders, they can be dangerous to use, resulting
in renal failure and back-pressure on the kidneys.
5.4. Catheters
The standard catheter type in practice is known as the Foley
catheter and has been in use with an essentially unchanged
mechanical design for 70 years [31]. Although innovative
approaches with regard to different coatings are still the
subject of ongoing research in order to reduce infections and
the formation of a biofilm, a more fundamental change for
innovative catheter design is needed [32]. At the same time
the standardization of the catheters used in practice is difficult
due to their availability, diversity and patient choice.
Assessment and management of incontinence
437
Trauma to the urethra can result when the catheter is
removed as a result of a ‘cuff’ of material forming at the site
of the deflated balloon, due to hysteresis within the material.
Solutions to this problem of ‘cuffing’ are currently under
investigation by the Devices for Dignity team to prevent
patient discomfort associated with routine catheter changes.
Major problems with all catheters, which is also influenced
by patient-related factors, are the problems of biofilm
formation, recurrent infection and associated encrustation of
catheters.
5.5. Catheter devices and bags
Owing to the significant incidence of infection, several
urinary catheter adjuncts have been developed. In order to
prevent the spillage of urine and potential contamination that
could occur during changing catheter bags, several polypropylene valves have been developed to lock-out urinary flow
[33]. At present, however, there are no clinical data available
to support the routine use of these devices over standard
catheter tubing. Although some patients would prefer a
smaller discreet valve, those with dexterity problems find
larger valves easier to operate [34]. In order to improve the
discreetness of catheters and aid patient comfort, a leg-bag
catheter tubing with a smaller diameter is currently being
investigated by Devices for Dignity. Recent data suggests that
kinks in catheter tubing are less likely to occur with smaller
diameter tubes, but urinary stasis, due to slower drainage, can
be associated with urinary tract infection [35]. Tubing with
anti-kinking features, such as corrugated tubing or a spiral
shaped design, can prevent occlusion of the catheter tube if
kinking does occur; however, these devices are purportedly
difficult to keep clean and are, therefore, not widely supported
by continence advisors. Furthermore, in order to reduce the
audible noise and visual ballooning associated with conventional catheter bags, companies have developed catheter bags
with an improved chamber design [36].
5.6. Clothing
For female patients with light incontinence, reusable pants
incorporating a pad are ergonomically acceptable; however,
they demonstrate a poor leakage performance [37]. These
products are generally more cost-effective than disposable
pads, although issues relating to odour control, skin care and
the frequency with which they may need to be changed are
commonly reported by patients.
More recently, clothing items that facilitate improved
access for patients to change pads, for example trousers with
an extended zipper, have been developed (http://www.continenceproductadvisor.org/products/clothingodourcontrolandskincare/clothing), while pads that inhibit urinary tract
infections, aid skin care and prevent odours are available
[38]. At present there are no large-scale clinical trial data
available to compare the cost-effectiveness of these devices.
5.7. Commodes and urinals
The basic design of commodes has changed little since their
invention. Issues such as the device’s appearance, comfort
and smell remain a problem, particularly in ward-based
438
C. J. Hillary et al.
J Med Eng Technol, 2015; 39(7): 434–440
environments and in the community. Patient safety with
regards to transfer onto the commode is a common problem,
with a significant proportion of nursing home related falls
occurring as a result of commode use (estimated 22.2% of
falls) [39]. Methods to alleviate this include commode designs
with improved brakes or static commodes; however, it is
likely that the transfer process itself of patient to commode is
implicated in the vast majority of fall episodes. The Devices
for Dignity ‘Dignity’ commode has been designed specifically for those who have a carer and incorporates a bidet
system with a dryer along with static feet for safer transfer and
use. Commode cleanliness and associated infections continue
to be a problem; however, a report from the Design Bugs Out
programme has demonstrated that commodes with fewer
removable parts are reportedly easier to clean by staff and
patients [40].
A variety of urinal designs are available to those who
have difficulty in accessing toilets due to mobility impairment. These devices are largely re-usable and can be
utilized either in a sitting, supine or standing position in
order to collect urine for later disposal. Some devices
incorporate a handle design for patients who can void in the
sitting position, for example in a wheelchair; however, female
urinals have difficulties with placement in a suitable position,
discomfort of material used or a feeling that the urinal
might leak [41].
6. Conclusions
Urinary incontinence is a common and distressing clinical
condition to manage for both patients and their carers,
particularly in the community. Despite this, the problem is
under-reported, under-recognized and poorly resourced, with
many patients buying absorbent products over the counter
instead of consulting a doctor or the continence service. There
have been recent advances in many aspects of continence care
in response to the challenges faced with current products and
devices, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Key summary of the current continence products, the challenges faced and possible solutions.
Standard options available
Diagnosis
Objective assessment of symptoms
UTIs in pad users
Treatment
Incontinence surgery
SUI – pelvic floor exercise
Electrical stimulation
Stress urinary incontinence
Electrical stimulation
Urge urinary incontinence
Management
Absorbent products
Recent Development
Issues still to be addressed
Bladder diary
Electronic bladder diary [7]
Dipstick test
Self-adhesive pad device
[42]
The widespread implementation of bladder
diaries into general use.
Sensitivity of the UTI test.
Appropriateness of treating colonized urine
in asymptomatic patients.
Autologous fascia sling and
Synthetic non-degradable mid-urethal tape
Degradable materials for
implantation [16]
Injectable sphincteric
approaches [17]
Motivational app [12]
Pelvic floor muscle training
TENS vaginal probes
devices
Sacral neuromadulation
Disposable tampon like
device [11]
Percutaneous peripheral
nerve stimulation [9]
Wide range of disposable
pads
Internal vaginal devices
Pads that prevent urine back
flow [22]
Flexible devices [23]
Penile Compression devices
Renewed interest [30]
Intermittent catheters
Single use catheter
Discrete compact set [43]
Indwelling catheters
Foley catheters
Infection/biofilm reduction
Designs to prevent ‘cuffing’
Catheter leg bags
Catheter leg bags
Sheaths
Variety of sheaths devices
Body-worn urinals
Female and male urinals
Discrete bag design, noise
reduction during movement [44]
End of glans devices for a
retracted penis
No recent developments
Handheld urinals
Female urinals
Pulp product (VernaFem)
Male urinals
Static and mobile
commodes
Disposable and non-disposable bedpans
Reusable pants with pad
Urine directors
Dignity commode, easier to
clean
No recent developments
Mechanical devices - SUI
Commodes
Bedpans
Clothing
Clothing with improved
access
Long-term safety using clinical trials.
The widespread implementation of pelvic
floor muscle training in patients with SUI.
Effectiveness and comfort assessed in large
scale trials.
Effectiveness and comfort assessed in large
scale trials.
Pad disposal costs and acceptability.
Comfort, acceptability of disposable and nondisposable varieties. Disposal costs.
Discreteness of device, comfort, ease of use,
complications of device.
Assessment of cost-effectiveness, reusable
single patient use catheter.
Improve antimicrobial properties, improve
mechanical design – prevent cuffing/balloon failure.
Poor aesthetic performance.
Poor leakage control, skin sores.
Poor leakage control, discomfort and poor
aesthetic performance.
Discomfort with reusable products, fear of
spillage, disposal costs.
Discreteness of product, disposal costs.
Risk of falls.
Difficult to use, do not permit appropriate
posture.
Odour, poorly absorbent.
DOI: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1088088
The rates of surgical cure of urinary incontinence in both
men and women is high; however, surgical treatments are
associated with significant complications. Despite promising
advances in the field of tissue engineering addressed at
reducing these surgical complications, the results of novel
synthetic materials are at an early stage. Therefore, many
patients opt for management to simply contain their incontinence instead of cure it.
The design of products, including absorbent materials,
external devices and catheters, has only progressed marginally
from their original designs. While disposable absorbent
products are preferred by patients with mild-to-moderate
urinary leakage, techniques to improve reusable materials
would be more cost-effective and reduce the disposal burden.
Declaration of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone
are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.
References
1. Bedoya-Ronga, A., and Currie, I., 2014, Improving the management of urinary incontinence. Practitioner, 258, 21–4, 2–3.
2. Abrams, P., Andersson, K.E., Birder, L., Brubaker L., Cardozo L.,
Chapple C., Cottenden A., Davila W., de Ridder D., Dmochowski
R., Drake M., Dubeau C., Fry C., Hanno P., Smith J.H., Herschorn
S., Hosker G., Kelleher C., Koelbl H., Khoury S., Madoff R.,
Milsom I., Moore K., Newman D., Nitti V., Norton C., Nygaard I.,
Payne C., Smith A., Staskin D., Tekgul S., Thuroff J., Tubaro A.,
Vodusek D., Wein A., Wyndaele J.J., 2010, Members of C, Fourth
International Consultation on I. Fourth International Consultation
on Incontinence Recommendations of the International Scientific
Committee: Evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence,
pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence. Neurourology and
urodynamics, 29, 213–240.
3. Minassian, V.A., Sun, H., Yan, X.S., Clarke D.N., Stewart W.F.,
2014, The interaction of stress and urgency urinary incontinence
and its effect on quality of life. International Urogynecology
Journal, 26, 269–276.
4. Turner, D.A., Shaw, C., McGrother, C.W., Dallosso H.M., Cooper
N.J., 2004, The cost of clinically significant urinary storage
symptoms for community dwelling adults in the UK. BJU
International, 93, 1246–1252.
5. Chapple, C.R., 2014, Is a voiding diary really necessary in 2014?
European Urology, 66, 301–302.
6. Bright, E., Cotterill, N., Drake, M., Abrams P., 2014, Developing
and validating the international consultation on incontinence
questionnaire bladder diary. European Urology, 66, 294–300.
7. Mangera, A., Marzo, A., Heron, N., Fernando D., Abdel-Maguid
M.M., Hameed K., Soliman A., Bradley M., Hosking I.,
Chapple C., 2012, Development and Assessment of Two
Electronic Bladder Diaries; a Pilot Study. Neurourology and
Urodynamics, 31, 770–771.
8. Slovak, M., Barker, A.T., and Chapple, C.R., 2013, The assessment
of a novel electrical stimulation waveform recently introduced for
the treatment of overactive bladder. Physiological measurement, 34,
479–486.
9. van Balken, M.R., 2007, Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation:
The Urgent PC device. Expert Review of Medical Devices, 4,
693–698.
10. Peters, K.M., Carrico, D.J., and Perez-Marrero, R.A., 2010,
efficacy in the treatment of overactive bladder syndrome: Results
from the SUmiT trial. Journal of Urology, 183, 1438–1443.
11. Oldham, J., Herbert, J., and McBride, K., 2013, Evaluation of a new
disposable ‘‘tampon like’’ electrostimulation technology
(Pelviva(R)) for the treatment of urinary incontinence in women:
A 12-week single blind randomized controlled trial. Neurourology
& Urodynamics, 32, 460–466.
12. Propagator Ltd, 2014, Squezzy app. Available online at: http://
www.squeezyapp.co.uk/. Accessed 21st Jan 2015.
Assessment and management of incontinence
439
13. Jones, R., Abrams, P., Hilton, P., Ward K., Drake M., 2010, Risk of
tape-related complications after TVT is at least 4%. Neurourology
& Urodynamics, 29, 0–41.
14. Lee, D., Dillon, B., Lemack, G., Gomelsky A., 2013, Transvaginal
mesh kits–how ‘‘serious’’ are the complications and are they
reversible? Urology, 81, 43–48.
15. Mangera, A., Bullock, A.J., Roman, S., Chapple C.R., MacNeil S.,
2013, Comparison of candidate scaffolds for tissue engineering for
stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse repair. BJU
International, 112, 674–685.
16. Roman Regueros, S., Albersen, M., Manodoro, S., Zia S., Osman
N.I., Bullock A.J., Chapple C.R., Deprest J., MacNeil S., 2014,
Acute in vivo response to an alternative implant for urogynecology.
Biomed Researh International, 2014, 853610.
17. Carr, L.K., Steele, D., Steele, S., Wagner D., Pruchnic R.,
Jankowski R., Erickson J., Huard J., Chancellor M.B., 2008,
1-year follow-up of autologous muscle-derived stem cell injection
pilot study to treat stress urinary incontinence. International
Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, 19, 881–883.
18. Chartier-Kastler, E., Van Kerrebroeck, P., Olianas, R., Cosson M.,
Mandron E., Delorme E., Richard F., 2011, Artificial urinary
sphincter (AMS 800) implantation for women with intrinsic
sphincter deficiency: A technique for insiders? BJU International,
107, 1618–1626.
19. Van der Aa, F., Drake, M.J., Kasyan, G.R., Petrolekas A., Cornu
J.N.., 2013, The artificial urinary sphincter after a quarter of a
century: A critical systematic review of its use in male nonneurogenic incontinence. European Urology, 63, 681–689.
20. Osman, N.I., 2013, Slings in the management of male stress urinary
incontinence. Current Opinion in Urology, 23, 528–535.
21. Fader, M., Cottenden, A.M., and Getliffe, K., 2008, Absorbent
products for moderate-heavy urinary and/or faecal incontinence in
women and men. Cochrane Database System Review, 2008,
CD007408.
22. Sugama, J., Sanada, H., Shigeta, Y., Nakagami G., Konya C., 2013,
Efficacy of an improved absorbent pad on incontinence-associated
dermatitis in older women: Cluster randomized controlled trial.
BMC Geriatrics, 12, 22.
23. Ziv, E., Stanton, S.L., and Abarbanel, J., 2008, Efficacy and safety
of a novel disposable intravaginal device for treating stress urinary
incontinence. Amerian Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 198,
594 e1–7.
24. Nielsen, K.K., Walter, S., Maegaard, E., Kromann-Andersen B.,
1993, The urethral plug II: An alternative treatment in women with
genuine urinary stress incontinence. British Journal of Urology, 72,
428–432.
25. Lipp, A., Shaw, C., and Glavind, K., 2011, Mechanical devices for
urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database System
Review, 2011, CD001756.
26. Golji, H., 1981, Complications of external condom drainage.
Paraplegia, 19, 189–197.
27. Fader, M., Pettersson, L., Dean, G., Brooks R, Cottenden A.M.,
Malone-Lee J., 2001, Sheaths for urinary incontinence: A
randomized crossover trial. BJU International, 88, 367–372.
28. Moore, K.N., Schieman, S., Ackerman, T., Dzus H.Y., Metcalfe
J.B., Voaklander D.C., 2004, Assessing comfort, safety, and patient
satisfaction with three commonly used penile compression devices.
Urology, 63, 150–154.
29. Van Bruwaene, S., Van der Aa, F., and De Ridder, D., 2014,
Review: The use of sling versus sphincter in post-prostatectomy
urinary incontinence. BJU International, 330–342.
30. Barnard, J., and Westenberg, A.M., 2014, The penile clamp:
Medieval pain or makeshift gain? Neurourology & Urodynaics,
115–116.
31. Havard, J., 2014, It’s time to change the catheter: This ubiquitous
but flawed medical device is letting patients down. British Medical
Journal, 348, g1932.
32. Feneley, R.C., Kunin, C.M., and Stickler, D.J., 2012, An indwelling
urinary catheter for the 21st century. BJU International, 109,
1746–1749.
33. Shbeeb, A., Young, J.L., Hart, S.A., Hart J.C., Gelman J., 2014,
Lock-out valve to decrease catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Advances in Urology, 2014, 765756.
34. Fader, M., Pettersson, L., Brooks, R., Dean G., Wells M., Cottenden
A., Malone-Lee J., 1997, A multicentre comparative evaluation of
440
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
C. J. Hillary et al.
catheter valves. British Journal of Nursing, 6, 359, 362–364, 366–
367.
Kubilay, Z., Archibald, L.K., Kirchner, H.L., Layon A.J., 2013,
What we don’t know may hurt us: Urinary drainage system tubing
coils and CA-UTIs-A prospective quality study. Amerian Journal of
Infection Control, 41, 1278–1280.
http://www.greatbearhealthcare.co.uk/our-products/libra-conformleg-bag Accessed: 21st January 2015.
Fader, M., Cottenden, A.M., and Getliffe, K., 2007, Absorbent
products for light urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane
Database System Review, 2007, CD001406.
Fukui, J., Sakai, Y., Hosaka, K., Yamashita T., Ogawa A., Shirai H.,
1990, A newly designed deodorant pad for urinary incontinence.
Journal of the American Geriatric Society, 38, 889–892.
Yap, L.K., Au, S.Y., Ang, Y.H., Ee C.H., 2003, Nursing home falls:
A local perspective. Annals Academy of Medicine Singapore, 32,
795–800.
J Med Eng Technol, 2015; 39(7): 434–440
40. HCAI Technology Innovation Programme. Design Bugs Out –
Product Evaluation. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/215293/
dh_131199.pdf. Accessed.
41. Fader, M., Pettersson, L., Dean, G., Brooks, R., Cottenden, A.,
1999, The selection of female urinals: Results of a multicentre
evaluation. British Journal of Nursing, 8, 918–920, 922–925.
42. Krahenbuhl, J.D., Beaulieu, C., and Gehri, M., 2012, Evaluation of
a novel in-vitro diagnostic device for the detection of urinary tract
infections in diaper wearing children. Swiss Medical Weekly, 142,
w13560.
43. Coloplast UK Ltd, Speedie Cath. Available online at: http://
www.coloplast.co.uk/speedicath-compact-female-en-gb.aspx.
Accessed 21st Jan 2015.
44. Great Bear Heatltcare Ltd, 2012, Libra Conform Leg Bag.
Available online at: http://www.greatbearhealthcare.co.uk/ourproducts/libra-conform-leg-bag. Accessed 21st Jan 2015.
Copyright of Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology is the property of Taylor &
Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
Article Review Template
Attached Files:
1. BIBLIOGRAPHIC ENTRY. Ruano, M., Colomo,
R., Gomez, J., Garcia, A. (2007), A mobile framework for competence
Journal of Technology Management & Innovation,
a;o/vol. 2, numero 003, Santiago, Chile, pp. 49-57
evaluation: innovation assessment using mobile information systems,
2. ABSTRACT. The environment
surrounding organizations is characterized by an increasing necessity
of competent personnel but with finite competence level. From the scope of the management of those
human resources, one of the most crucial aspects is to be able to measure the competence level of
each professional as quickly and precisely as possible. This paper introduces a tool, based on HR-XML
standard, to feed competence evaluation with data or evidences that help to fit performance
evaluations to the performance of the employees. Mobility capabilities in performance evaluation,
particularly in the innovation field, involve an inventive contribution to current Competence
Management Systems that, due to their lack of flexibility, hinder the full development of the
capability to include evidences wherever they may take place, whether it is at work, at client’s office
or in a recruitment interview.
3. BIG IDEAS. This article describes a new competence management tool that is based on two main
characteristics: mobility and cross-platform architecture.
The model presented in this article integrates the capabilities of a tool developed under open-source
philosophy and based on the last XML standards with one of the most popular clients nowadays, the
smart phone.
Competence is understood as the set of knowledge, skills and attitudes required in people to perform
a specific task in an efficient way (Sagi-Vela Grande, 2004). Competences’ main characteristic is that
they comprise a whole set of knowledge, procedures, attitudes and features that complement each
other so that an individual must “know” “know how” and “Know how to be” to face professional
situations in an effective way.
Human Resources management is a crucial process for the proper daily operation of organizations.
Particularly, a substantial number of companies related to technology and innovation are structured
in a project-oriented way.
Several authors consider “Innovation” as a dependent observation competence; what means that
should be identified by the observation of a set of several competences (Robinson et alt 2007).
The motivation of this paper is to introduce a model to allow the assessment of competences in the
field of organizations whose resources perform their duties by means of mobile technologies.
The point of developing this model is that the data acquisition based on competence evidences, can
be carried out not only during the usual annual competence interview, but during the whole time
that the employees are performing their work activities.
The designed solution is intended to, among other functionalities; support the process of
documenting competence evidences wherever they may take place: meetings at clients’ office,
different acts and events.
4. STRENGTHS. I think is a great idea to be able to evaluate the people you work with or to be
evaluated at all times, because some times when is evaluation ( the traditional that is one time per
year) time you might run into a fight/discussion with a coworker and you might get bad evaluations
because of that. I think is a great point to be able to evaluate in a mobile device.
I think I will try to do some experiment of how use full it is and if people actually feel comfortable
with this.
Will this not become like a waste of time later on??
5. WEAKNESSES. I think it address the importance of having a Smart Phone or a Pocket PCs, but
what about MAC’s?? I think they just narrow themselves to a certain product instead of considering
all kind of products.
Will the people have to have all of them smart phones??? Will these be an extra cost to the
companies?? Who will review all the information and data collected??
6. VALUE ADDED. I think the article was great and has a lot of value; since nowadays we do
everything in mobile devices, why not try something like this to evaluate your coworkers and to be
evaluated at all times…
Usually we do it once a year and sometimes not even that, depends in the company you are working,
like this we can do pretty much everything..
I will like to try to chat in a classroom or have a blackboard chat in a mobile device… have not try that
yet…
7. SELF ASSESSMENT. I give myself an B.
I think there is still room for improvement. I found hard to find
the article this time and I think it was a great article and I learn a lot from it. My grammar is not good
and that's why I give myself a B.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment