Williams Kate S, Assassa R Phil, Cooper Nicola J, Turner David A, Shaw Christine, Abrams Keith R, Mayne Christopher, Jagger Carol, Matthews Ruth, Clarke Michael, McGrother Catherine W
University of Leicester, Leicester.
Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Sep;55(518):696-703.
Continence services in the UK have developed at different rates within differing care models, resulting in scattered and inconsistent services. Consequently, questions remain about the most cost-effective method of delivering these services.
To evaluate the impact of a new service led by a continence nurse practitioner compared with existing primary/secondary care provision for people with urinary incontinence and storage symptoms.
Randomised controlled trial with a 3- and 6-month follow-up in men and women (n = 3746) aged 40 years and over living in private households (intervention [n = 2958]; control [n = 788]).
Leicestershire and Rutland, UK.
The continence nurse practitioner intervention comprised a continence service provided by specially trained nurses delivering evidence-based interventions using predetermined care pathways. They delivered an 8-week primary intervention package that included advice on diet and fluids; bladder training; pelvic floor awareness and lifestyle advice. The standard care arm comprised access to existing primary care including GP and continence advisory services in the area. Outcome measures were recorded at 3 and 6 months post-randomisation.
The percentage of individuals who improved (with at least one symptom alleviated) at 3 months was 59% in the intervention group compared with 48% in the standard care group (difference of 11%, 95% CI = 7 to 16; P<0.001) The percentage of people reporting no symptoms or 'cured' was 25% in the intervention group and 15% in the standard care group (difference of 10%, 95% CI = 6 to 13, P = 0.001). At 6 months the difference was maintained. There was a significant difference in impact scores between the two groups at 3 and 6 months.
The continence nurse practitioner-led intervention reduced the symptoms of incontinence, frequency, urgency and nocturia at 3 and 6 months; impact was reduced; and satisfaction with the new service was high.
英国的尿失禁服务在不同的护理模式下以不同的速度发展,导致服务分散且不一致。因此,关于提供这些服务的最具成本效益的方法仍存在疑问。
评估由尿失禁专科护士主导的新服务与现有的针对尿失禁和储尿症状患者的初级/二级护理服务相比的效果。
对年龄在40岁及以上居住在私人家庭中的男性和女性(n = 3746)进行为期3个月和6个月随访的随机对照试验(干预组[n = 2958];对照组[n = 788])。
英国莱斯特郡和拉特兰。
尿失禁专科护士干预包括由经过专门培训的护士提供的尿失禁服务,这些护士使用预先确定的护理路径进行循证干预。他们提供了一个为期8周的初级干预方案,包括饮食和液体方面的建议、膀胱训练、盆底感知和生活方式建议。标准护理组包括利用该地区现有的初级护理,包括全科医生和尿失禁咨询服务。在随机分组后3个月和6个月记录结果指标。
干预组在3个月时症状改善(至少一种症状缓解)的个体百分比为59%,而标准护理组为48%(差异为11%,95%CI = 7至16;P<0.001)。报告无症状或“治愈”的人群百分比在干预组为25%,在标准护理组为15%(差异为10%,95%CI = 6至13,P = 0.001)。在6个月时差异仍然存在。两组在3个月和6个月时的影响评分存在显著差异。
由尿失禁专科护士主导的干预在3个月和6个月时减轻了尿失禁、尿频、尿急和夜尿症状;影响有所降低;对新服务的满意度较高。