Surgery for recurrent stress urinary incontinence. The Three S study.
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Surgery for recurrent stress urinary incontinence: surgeons’ and women’s views. The Three S study.
IRAS ID
163383
Contact name
Douglas Tincello
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Leicester
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 11 months, 30 days
Research summary
Over 12,000 women in the UK have surgery for incontinence (bladder weakness) every year. Surgery is very successful, but up to 15% of women (1 in 7) will not be cured and will require a second operation.
At present there is no evidence about which of the four or five possible surgeries are most effective for these women who need a second operation. These four or five different operations carry different risks. Some require a general anaesthetic and a large surgical incision while others do not. Some require a longer period of recovery than others before women can return to their normal activities.
The best way for us to gather the evidence that doctors and their patients need to help them to choose between treatments is to run a surgical research study to compare the different operations. But before we can do this, we have to do some preparatory research to find out some important things:
1)what do patients themselves think and feel about the alternative operations available, what are their priorities when choosing treatments, and which operations do they feel a future research study should compare?
2)which of the possible operations do UK surgeons regard as the most effective and safe, and most suitable and important to compare in a future research study?In this preparatory study, we will interview a group of women who have had repeat surgery, or who are waiting for repeat surgery, to explore their views and attitudes. We will ask whether research into the “best” second operation is important, and seek views on which of the alterative procedures are most acceptable in terms of likely cure, complications, and the recovery time involved. We will describe the planned research and seek women’s views on the most appropriate outcome measure of the range of tools available to us (e.g. bladder diary, disease specific questionnaires, pad tests).
We will also run a survey of UK doctors to seek their views of which of the alternative procedures are regarded as most acceptable, and which comparisons would be most important to make. Some of the doctors will also be interviewed.
The information we gather in this study will be used to design future research that will compare those operations that are identified as being most important and preferable by patients and doctors. The future research will provide evidence that can be used by both patients and doctors to make treatment choices.
REC name
East Midlands - Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/EM/1184
Date of REC Opinion
7 Oct 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion