Urinary incontinence care

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

Among women with a positive preoperative prolapse-reduction stress test, the sling appeared to provide greater benefit at 3 months (29.6% vs 71.9% incontinence, adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34)

Effect: improvement; Positive stress test: 29.6% sling vs 71.9% sham, adjusted OR 0.13; CI: 95% CI 0.05 to 0.34

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months

At 3 months, the sling group had significantly greater improvement in urinary symptoms (PFDI including UDI stress subscale and Incontinence Severity Index) than the sham group, but at 12 months only t

Effect: improvement; Greater improvement in UDI stress subscale and ISI in sling group at 3 and 12 months