The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A multi-centre evaluation of absorbent products for men with light urinary incontinence

A multi-centre evaluation of absorbent products for men with light urinary incontinence
A multi-centre evaluation of absorbent products for men with light urinary incontinence
Aims
This study compared the performance of the four main designs of absorbents for men with light incontinence: pouches (shields), leafs (guards), washable pant with integral pad (pantegral), and small disposable pad.
Materials and Methods
We did a multiple crossover trial. Men with light urinary incontinence were recruited. All pouches and leafs available in the UK were identified for inclusion. A single pantegral and small pad were selected based on previous evaluations for design comparison. Products were tested in random order for up to 1 week. Performance criteria (e.g., leakage and comfort) were rated using a validated product performance questionnaire. Wet product weights and amount of leakage were recorded in pad leakage diaries. Overall opinion for design performance was used as the primary outcome indicator.
Results
Seventy-four men tested six leafs, six pouches, one pantegral, and one small pad. Leakage data was taken from 3,386 wet pads. The pouches generally performed poorly with few significant differences between products. The leafs were more variable with large and significant differences in ratings. Overall the leaf, pantegral, and small pad designs performed significantly better than the pouch (P ≤ 0.01) and the pantegral design performed significantly worse than the leaf (P = 0.01). One leaf product was outstanding and performed significantly better than all other designs (P ≤ 0.001). Neurourol. Urodynam. 25:689-695, 2006.
Conclusion
This is the first published trial of absorbent products specifically designed for men. Results show that one particular leaf product works best, the pantegral is most suitable only for very light incontinence and the pouches are least successful.
incontinence, men, pads
0733-2467
689-695
Fader, M.
c318f942-2ddb-462a-9183-8b678faf7277
Macaulay, M.
505970d3-1e67-4c1f-8291-3a950d336c6b
Pettersson, L.
5b52b4ef-3d89-493a-92d3-e4c4752107ea
Brooks, R.
c147b4e8-cc8c-484b-a444-67c3bb418488
Cottenden, A.
28e7146a-44b1-4e89-8b37-91f994c04eb3
Fader, M.
c318f942-2ddb-462a-9183-8b678faf7277
Macaulay, M.
505970d3-1e67-4c1f-8291-3a950d336c6b
Pettersson, L.
5b52b4ef-3d89-493a-92d3-e4c4752107ea
Brooks, R.
c147b4e8-cc8c-484b-a444-67c3bb418488
Cottenden, A.
28e7146a-44b1-4e89-8b37-91f994c04eb3

Fader, M., Macaulay, M., Pettersson, L., Brooks, R. and Cottenden, A. (2006) A multi-centre evaluation of absorbent products for men with light urinary incontinence. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 25 (7), 689-695. (doi:10.1002/nau.20259).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Aims
This study compared the performance of the four main designs of absorbents for men with light incontinence: pouches (shields), leafs (guards), washable pant with integral pad (pantegral), and small disposable pad.
Materials and Methods
We did a multiple crossover trial. Men with light urinary incontinence were recruited. All pouches and leafs available in the UK were identified for inclusion. A single pantegral and small pad were selected based on previous evaluations for design comparison. Products were tested in random order for up to 1 week. Performance criteria (e.g., leakage and comfort) were rated using a validated product performance questionnaire. Wet product weights and amount of leakage were recorded in pad leakage diaries. Overall opinion for design performance was used as the primary outcome indicator.
Results
Seventy-four men tested six leafs, six pouches, one pantegral, and one small pad. Leakage data was taken from 3,386 wet pads. The pouches generally performed poorly with few significant differences between products. The leafs were more variable with large and significant differences in ratings. Overall the leaf, pantegral, and small pad designs performed significantly better than the pouch (P ≤ 0.01) and the pantegral design performed significantly worse than the leaf (P = 0.01). One leaf product was outstanding and performed significantly better than all other designs (P ≤ 0.001). Neurourol. Urodynam. 25:689-695, 2006.
Conclusion
This is the first published trial of absorbent products specifically designed for men. Results show that one particular leaf product works best, the pantegral is most suitable only for very light incontinence and the pouches are least successful.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: September 2006
Keywords: incontinence, men, pads

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 43811
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/43811
ISSN: 0733-2467
PURE UUID: 6087dcc4-93ad-4549-a90f-7d8dd36b722e
ORCID for M. Macaulay: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-1737-4589

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 31 Jan 2007
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 04:32

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: M. Fader
Author: M. Macaulay ORCID iD
Author: L. Pettersson
Author: R. Brooks
Author: A. Cottenden

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×