Which treatments do children with newly diagnosed non-organic urinary incontinence receive? An analysis of 3,188 outpatient cases from Germany

Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Neurourology and urodynamics, Vol. 31, No. 1 (2012), p. 93-8
Main Author: Hoffmann, Falk
Other Involved Persons: Steuber, Christian ; Günther, Judith ; Glaeske, Gerd ; Bachmann, Christian J
Format: electronic Article
Language:English
ISSN:1520-6777
Item Description:Date Completed 02.07.2012
Date Revised 19.11.2015
published: Print-Electronic
Citation Status MEDLINE
Copyright: From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Physical Description:Online-Ressource
DOI:10.1002/nau.21177
Subjects:
QR Code: Show QR Code
Description:
  • Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
  • AIMS: Objectives of this study were to examine the administrative incidence of urinary incontinence in children and to assess related outpatient health services utilization in this cohort
  • METHODS: Data of a statutory health insurance company were analyzed and outpatients from 1 to 18 years of age with a first recorded ICD-10 code for non-organic urinary incontinence during a 1-year-period (2007) were identified. For this cohort, the prescription of desmopressin, antispasmodics, non-selective monoamine reuptake inhibitors, alarm devices, and incontinence pads in the quarter of the first diagnosis and in the following one (i.e., 6 months) was evaluated with respect to age and gender
  • RESULTS: 3,188 patients (59.4% male; mean age 6.8 years) matched the inclusion criteria, of whom 25.4% were under 5 years old. 7.9% were prescribed desmopressin, 7.4% received urinary antispasmodics, and 7.0% were treated with alarm devices. For 77.9% of patients, no specific incontinence-related treatments were prescribed. We found considerable differences in treatment patterns between age groups, with patients ≥ 7 years receiving desmopressin more frequently than alarm devices. Regarding gender differences, the proportion of males treated with alarm devices (prevalence ratio [PR] 1.46; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.11-1.92) and at least one specific treatment (PR 1.19; 95%CI 1.04-1.35) remained statistically significantly higher, even after adjusting for age
  • CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we found evidence that treatment modalities only partly comply with the current guidelines for treatment of children and adolescents with non-organic urinary incontinence. Therefore, the dissemination of current guidelines remains a major educational goal