Monocentric Prospective, Randomized, Non-blinded, Active-controlled Trial to Evaluate the Non-inferiority of Functional Magnetic Stimulation (FMS) on the Tesla Chair Compared to Physiotherapy in First or Second-degree Urinary Incontinence
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Not yet recruiting
- Sponsor
- Kantonsspital Winterthur KSW
- Enrollment
- 100
- Primary Endpoint
- Change in ICIQ-SF UI Score
Overview
Brief Summary
100 patients with mild to moderate urinary incontinence will be randomly divided into two groups. One half will receive functional magnetic stimulation with the Tesla Chair for three months, while the other half will be treated with pelvic floor physiotherapy for the same period. After three and six months, a comparison will be made to determine which patient groups experience an improvement in urinary incontinence and how their muscle strength improves.
Detailed Description
Urinary incontinence is a debilitating condition that significantly impacts patients' quality of life, contributing to anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal. The severity of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is directly correlated with increased physical and psychological burden. Although lifestyle modifications can offer moderate symptom relief, the current gold-standard first-line treatment is pelvic floor physiotherapy, with surgical intervention reserved for refractory cases.
Functional magnetic stimulation (FMS) has demonstrated positive effects in patients with urinary incontinence, including improvements in urodynamic parameters. However, limited research has directly compared the efficacy of FMS as a first-line therapy with standard pelvic floor physiotherapy. Addressing this gap is essential for informing clinical practice and expanding evidence-based therapeutic options. The efficacy of pelvic floor physiotherapy is commonly evaluated using the Oxford Scale, which provides an objective measure of pelvic floor muscle contraction strength. Additionally, patient-reported outcomes are assessed using validated instruments, including the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF UI) and the German Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (Deutscher Beckenbodenfragebogen), capturing symptom severity and quality of life. Together, these endpoints-objective assessments and patient-reported outcomes-offer a comprehensive evaluation of treatment effectiveness.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- None
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- Female
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Age ≥ 18 years
- •Urinary incontinence of first or second degree
- •Written informed consent
- •German speaking (Study information and IC available only in German)
Exclusion Criteria
- •Pregnancy or desire to become pregnant
- •Urinary incontinence of third degree
- •Third or fourth degree pelvic organ prolapses
- •no noticeable voluntary muscle activity according to Oxford = O/5
- •Genital infections
- •Malignant tumors
- •Severe neurological diseases
- •Cardiac arrhythmia
- •Active internal medical devices e.g. cardiac pacemakers, medication pumps etc.
- •Ferromagnetic implants at or near the site of stimulation
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Change in ICIQ-SF UI Score
Time Frame: 6-months post-treatment (9 months from baseline)
Change in the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form for Urinary Incontinence (ICIQ-SF UI) score from baseline to 6 months after treatment
Secondary Outcomes
- Change in pelvic floor muscle strength, measured by the Oxford Scale(6 months post-treatment (9 months from baseline))