Table 1.
Characteristics of the interview participantsa.
| Participants | UIb outcomes | UI at baseline | Relevant experience | |||||||||||
|
|
# | Age (years) | Level of educationc | Severityd change | PGI-Ie | Severity score | Impactf score | Type | Duration (years) | Previous PFMTg | Smartphone/tableth (years) | |||
| Treatment success | ||||||||||||||
|
|
1 | 65 | Higher | –6 | 6 | 10 | 33 | Stress | 4 | No | 8 | |||
|
|
2 | 67 | Higher | –8 | 6 | 16 | 59 | Urge | 5 | No | 2 | |||
|
|
3 | 54 | Lower | –7 | 7 | 12 | 42 | Stress | 20 | Yes | 2 | |||
|
|
4 | 61 | Lower | –5 | 6 | 10 | 37 | Stress | 20 | Yes | 5 | |||
|
|
5 | 46 | Higher | –5 | 6 | 7 | 32 | Stress | 2 | No | 8 | |||
|
|
6 | 48 | Higher | –7 | 5 | 13 | 36 | Stress | 6 | No | 15 | |||
|
|
7 | 71 | Higher | –5 | 5 | 14 | 51 | Urge | 15 | No | 8 | |||
|
|
8 | 78 | Lower | –5 | 6 | 10 | 37 | Stress | 20 | Yes | 1 | |||
|
|
9 | 44 | Lower | –5 | 5 | 11 | 32 | Urge | 15 | No | —i | |||
| Treatment failure | ||||||||||||||
|
|
10 | 54 | Lower | 2 | 6 | 6 | 32 | Stress | 5 | No | 5 | |||
|
|
11 | 65 | Lower | 3 | 4 | 5 | 23 | Stress | 10 | No | 6 | |||
|
|
12 | 48 | Lower | 1 | 6 | 12 | 51 | Stress | 12 | Yes | 10 | |||
|
|
13 | 48 | Higher | 1 | 5 | 4 | 25 | Urge | 16 | No | 10 | |||
|
|
14 | 43 | Higher | 1 | 4 | 5 | 27 | Urge | 0.25 | No | 3 | |||
|
|
15 | 63 | Higher | 1 | 4 | 4 | 32 | Urge | 3 | No | 7 | |||
|
|
16 | 42 | Higher | 1 | 6 | 7 | 26 | Stress | 0.42 | No | 6 | |||
|
|
17 | 35 | Lower | 1 | 5 | 9 | 27 | Urge | 20 | Yes | — | |||
aWomen using app-based treatment purposefully sampled based on change of urinary incontinence severity (ICIQ-UI-SF score) after 4 months. All measures were self-reported and recorded at baseline except for the ICIQ-UI-SF change score and the PGI-I, which were recorded at 4-month follow-up.
bUI: urinary incontinence.
cLower: primary or secondary education; higher: tertiary education or higher.
dSeverity was based on International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire Urinary Incontinence Short Form; range 0-21, higher score means worse incontinence.
ePGI-I: Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Likert scale ranging from 0 (very much worse) to 7 (very much better), with 4 reflecting no change.
fImpact based on International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life; range 19-67, higher score reflects larger impact of urinary incontinence on quality of life.
gPFMT: pelvic floor muscle therapy.
hYears in possession of device.
iNot applicable.