↓ Skip to main content

The combination of herbal medicine Weng-li-tong with Tolterodine may be better than Tolterodine alone in the treatment of overactive bladder in women: a randomized placebo-controlled prospective trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Urology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The combination of herbal medicine Weng-li-tong with Tolterodine may be better than Tolterodine alone in the treatment of overactive bladder in women: a randomized placebo-controlled prospective trial
Published in
BMC Urology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12894-016-0167-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong-dong Xiao, Jian-wei Lv, Xin Xie, Xing-wei Jin, Mu-jun Lu, Yuan Shao

Abstract

To assess the efficacy and safety of the herbal medicine, Weng-li-tong (WLT) as monotherapy or combined with tolterodine in women with overactive bladder (OAB). A prospective, randomized, single-blind multi-center trial was performed which included 182 OAB patients treated with either placebo (n = 26), WLT (n = 52), tolterodine (n = 52) or WLT plus tolterodine (n = 52). The overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS) and micturition behavior were measured to evaluate treatment efficacy. In total, 146 patients [placebo (n = 23), WLT (n = 39), tolterodine (n = 41) and WLT plus tolterodine (n = 43)] completed 8 weeks of treatment. Compared to those treated with placebo, patients in three intervention groups showed significant improvements in the OABSS, voiding frequency, average voided volume and urgency incontinence. WLT had a slower onset than tolterodine or combination therapy in reducing urgency incontinence. Compared with tolterodine, WLT had a weaker effect in improving OABSS (P = 0.022) and daily voiding frequency (P = 0.034). The combination therapy had better efficacy than WLT or tolterodine alone in improving the OABSS, voiding frequency and voided volume. No significant differences in the changes in quality of life scores were observed among the three intervention groups. Residual urine increased significantly in tolterodine group (P = 0.004), but not in combination group. WLT resulted in fewer adverse effects than tolterodine such as dry mouth (P = 0.002), weak stream (P = 0.002) and less residual urine (P < 0.001). WLT could improve OAB symptoms in women, while it had slower onset and weaker efficacy but fewer adverse effects than tolterodine. The combination of WLT and tolterodine was more efficacious than tolterodine alone in improving OAB symptoms. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry [ ChiCTR-IPR-14005626 ]. Date of registration: 7 December 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 18 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Unspecified 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 20 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,269,286
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#351
of 751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,995
of 364,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 751 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.