Expectations and Perceptions of Dutch Pharmacy Staff Regarding a New Framework for Continence Care:A Focus Group Study

Based on complaints that patients with urinary incontinence were not receiving the correct medical aids, the Dutch Ministry of Health, Wellbeing, and Sports requested further exploration. This resulted in a new framework based on considering individual activities of daily living when providing continence products. We aimed to explore the expectations of pharmacy staff regarding this new framework for continence care in the Netherlands and to establish the facilitators and barriers associated with that care. In total, 15 participants from 7 different pharmacies participated in 2 focus groups. Data analysis was by thematic content analysis. Pharmacy employees were positive about the idea of considering individual daily activities when providing continence products in the new framework, but they did have some reservations about the feasibility of implementation in daily practice. Barriers to optimal continence care included low reimbursement for patients with incontinence, especially with non-standard needs, and poor communication between the various stakeholders in continence care. Efforts must be extended to review the current reimbursement system and to change the policies and information provided by stakeholders in continence care, before the new framework will make a real impact in clinical practice

Primary care diagnostic and treatment pathways in Dutch women with urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how GPs manage women with urinary incontinence (UI) in the Netherlands and to assess whether this is in line with the relevant Dutch GP guideline. Because UI has been an underreported and undertreated problem for decades despite appropriate guidelines being created for general practitioners (GPs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Routine primary care data for 2017 in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: We included the primary care records of women aged 18-75 years with at least one contact registered for UI, and then extracted information about baseline characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, and referral to pelvic physiotherapy or secondary care. RESULTS: In total, 374 records were included for women aged 50.3 ± 15.1 years. GPs diagnosed 31.0%, 15.2%, and 15.0% women with stress, urgency, or mixed UI, respectively; no diagnosis of type was recorded in 40.4% of women. Urinalysis was the most frequently used diagnostic test (42.5%). Education was the most common treatment, offered by 17.9% of GPs; however, no treatment or referral was reported in 15.8% of cases. As many as 28.7% and 21.7% of women were referred to pelvic physiotherapy and secondary care, respectively. CONCLUSION: Female UI is most probably not managed in line with the relevant Dutch GP guideline. It is also notable that Dutch GPs often fail to report the type of UI, to use available diagnostic approaches, and to provide appropriate education. Moreover, GPs referred to specialists too often, especially for the management of urgency UI.Key pointsUrinary incontinence (UI) has been an underreported and undertreated problem for decades. Despite various guidelines, UI often lies outside the GPs comfort zone.•According to this study: general practitioners do not treat urinary incontinence according to guidelines.•The type of incontinence is frequently not reported and diagnostic approaches are not fully used.•We believe that increased awareness will help improve treatment and avoidable suffering

Effectiveness and costs of a new framework for selecting absorbent urinary incontinence products compared with current practice:a cohort study

Objectives To improve continence care in the Netherlands, a new framework has been developed in which a shift has been made from incontinence severity as the sole criterion for selecting incontinence products to a focus on patient need for daily life activities. The impact of the framework on daily care has not been assessed. We aimed to compare treatment effectiveness and costs between participants who did and did not undergo re-evaluation according to the new framework. Design Cohort study Setting Twelve pharmacies in the Netherlands Participants Existing users of absorbent incontinence materials for urinary incontinence. Interventions Participants were offered the option to have their incontinence products re-evaluated within the new framework at their pharmacy. Primary and secondary outcome measures Effectiveness and cost outcomes were assessed at 3 and 6 months through questionnaires. These questionnaires included the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life Module, ICIQ Urinary Incontinence Short Form, ICIQ Absorbent Pads, questions about satisfaction and the iPCQ and iMCQ. Results 303 users consented and 279 completed the baseline questionnaire. Of these participants, 72 agreed to a re-evaluation of their incontinence materials. There was a small improvement at 3 months in the re-evaluation group compared with the other group on most outcomes. However, these improvements were not clinically relevant. Moreover, these differences did not change much from 3 to 6 months. Small differences were also observed in the changes in costs, but with very wide CIs on both sides of zero (euro99.38; 95% CI -633.48 to 832.23). Conclusions The current study showed no clinically relevant effect of a newly implemented framework for selecting incontinence materials in pharmacies when compared with an existing method. Given that the study also showed no differences in effectiveness and costs, introducing the new framework in pharmacies may not lead to better incontinence care.</p

Association of Supply Source with Continence Product and Care Satisfaction in Patients with Urinary Incontinence

Purpose: We aimed to examine how supply source affects satisfaction with continence products and care among individuals with urinary incontinence (UI). Supply source was compared among pharmacies, national suppliers, and shops. The secondary aim was to compare participant characteristics between the three groups. Patients and Methods: A survey questionnaire was distributed via social media between April and June 2020. This included the international consultation on incontinence questionnaire (ICIQ) UI short form (ICIQ-UI-SF), the ICIQ-PadPROM, and the ICIQ-LUTSqol, together with questions about respondent characteristics and satisfaction with continence products. Results: Of the 1045 respondents, 706 fully completed and 339 partially completed the survey. Among these, 322 (45.6%), 199 (28.1%), and 185 (26.2%) made purchases from shops, national suppliers, and pharmacies, respectively. The mean ICIQ-UI-SF sum scores were comparable for the pharmacy (13.3 ± 3.7) and national supplier (13.8 ± 3.5) groups, but were significantly lower for the shop group (12.0 ± 3.3). Mean sum scores for satisfaction with continence products and satisfaction with continence care were also significantly lower in the shop group (7.9 ± 2.6 and 6.4 ± 2.7, respectively) compared with the pharmacy (9.1 ± 2.7 and 7.9 ± 2.6, respectively) and national supplier (9.3 ± 2.6 and 8.1 ± 3.0, respectively) groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the ICIQ-PadPROM and ICIQ-LUTSqol scores. Respondents’ characteristics were similar, apart from the significantly lower number of males in the shop group. Conclusion: Satisfaction with continence products and continence care is lower for people with UI who purchase materials from a shop than from a pharmacy or national supplier