¿Mejora un detector de humedad la calidad de vida de los pacientes con incontinencia urinaria?: Un estudio piloto / Do the incontinent patients improve their quality of life using a humidity detector device?

RESUMEN

FUNDAMENTO Estimar el efecto de un detector de humedad en la calidad de vida de los pacientes con incontinencia urinaria por rebosamiento. MÉTODO: Estudio antes-después, valorando la calidad de vida mediante cuestionarios específicos para incontinencia urinaria, traducidos y adaptados a nuestro medio Consecuencias de la Incontinencia (Incontinence Impact Questionnaire original) y Malestar en el Área Urogenital (Urogenital Distress Inventory original). Los sujetos de estudio fueron personas con Incontinencia por rebosamiento de distintas etiologías, que requieren una reeducación vesical para procurar un vaciado periódico. RESULTADOS: El poder del estudio para detectar la mejoría relevante de 58 puntos en el CDI fue de 71 por ciento. La mejoría observada en el CDI fue de 5.5 puntos (95 por ciento CI= -34,56 a 45,56) y en el MAU de -11.87 (95 por cientoCI= -52,45 a 28,71). CONCLUSIONES: No observamos un impacto positivo en la CV, ya que las pérdidas continuas, obligaban a cambiar constantemente los absorbentes (AU)

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of a humidity detector device on the quality of life of patients with urinary incontinence IU. METHOD: Quasi-experimental study a series of ten cases followed for a month. The devices were placed and the questionaires filled in before and after using it for at least ten hours a day during a month. Health related quality of life was assessed through the questionaires for IU convalidated and adapted to our specific environment Urogenital Inventory Distress (UDI) and Incontinence Impact Questionary (IIQ). An improvement of 58 points by a four option Likert scale was considered a positive impact in the quality of life (IIQ). The scores obtained in UDI and IIQ are described before and after use the device and paried T test and Wilcoxon sign test were carried out to compare the scores obtained in each instance. The capacity to detect a difference of 58 points on the UDI scale was calculated (minimum relevant difference). A binomial test was undertaken to ascertain a probability of achieving an increase in the above mentioned index which would exceed the clinical relevance threshold. RESULTS: Average increase in IIQ improvement x=5.48 (Std Error = 20.43) 95% CI=-34.56 to 45.56. Average increase in UDI improvement x=-11.87 (Std Error = 20.70) 95% IC=-52.45 to 28.70. The power of the analysis to detect as relevant a difference of a 588 point increase in IIQ 71.1% and probability of obtaining a relevant improvement in the questionaire IIQ 10% (IC 95%) 0% to 39.4%. CONCLUSIONS: A negative impact in the Quality of Life due to frequent changes of incontinence pads (AU)