Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
Following years of Problems my urogynaecology physio recommended Efemia. I had put on a little weight due to not being able to exercise without embarrassment & life was becoming awful. I have always been so active and have a physical job, so it was so upsetting. I tried the item and instantly have found it to be a godsend! For women diagnosed with SUI, Efemia can be an effective and safe alternative, either temporarily, while waiting for surgery, or to be able to avoid surgery altogether. Furthermore, since Efemia is available “over-the-counter,” it might improve the daily lives of active women experiencing urine leakage during physical exercise, who might not see themselves as generally incontinent and therefore do not seek medical help. A weakness of the TVS3000 investigation is that the device usage was surprisingly low, such that most of the responders had used Efemia only a few times during the 4-week trial period. The reason for this is not clear. It could be either that the participants had very mild incontinence and only experienced urine leakage a few times during the 4-week trial period or that they were not fully dedicated to the study, but rather participated to collect loyalty points from Aller Media. 6. Conclusion
Have you done your pelvic floor exercises, improved your core, modified high impact and improved your fluid management? Still not quite resolved your bladder leakage? Then one of the bladder support pessaries may offer an alternative to surgery ( NICE Guideline NG123 2019). They have a similar mechanism of action (mechanical support of the urethra) to the TVT and colposuspension surgical procedures but no side effects or surgical risk. Bladder support pessaries are best for small leaks associated with movement. Or leaks when the bladder is under pressure from coughing, sneezing or laughing (stress urinary incontinence). The aim of the present clinical investigation and postmarket studies was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and usabillity of Efemia. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Investigational DeviceSome of the marketing blurbs list “strengthen your pelvic floor” as a benefit of using their pessary device. This is only true in the loosest meaning. While they are in place, by artificially re-inforcing the vagina wall, I suppose you could claim that is “strengthening” the pelvic floor action – but they are in no way making any change to the muscle. Only exercise can change the composition and activity of the muscles or surgery the non-muscular elements. When you take the device out the structural situation remains the same.However, these devices definitely offer an alternative to surgery. Or a Buy Some Time option if you need to complete your family or are undecided about a bigger procedure. Living life to the full
Likelihood to recommend (graph (a)) and mean change in the IIQ-7 score (graph (b)), plotted against facilitation of everyday life, TVS3000 ( n = 30). 5. Discussion So if you have had good success with one of the devices above this would be a natural progression to a potentially more environmentally friendly and overall less expensive option. Any information or guidance we provide is not a substitute for the consultation, diagnosis, and/or medical treatment of your doctor or healthcare provider.
In my clinical experience, these support pessaries work particularly well in certain situations. For example when the bladder has dropped only a little bit and the uterus is still well supported. Or, if exercises have created a good layer of muscles but you still need more bladder support to be active. How do internal bladder support pessaries reduce urinary leakage?
A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial and four postmarket user acceptance investigations were carried out to document the safety, performance, and user acceptance of Efemia Bladder Support, a novel vaginal inlay for the temporary reduction of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The clinical investigation enrolled 97 women diagnosed with SUI, randomized 3 : 1 to either treatment or standard care (control). The primary endpoint was reduction of urine leakage, measured as change in pad weight baseline week compared with treatment week. Secondary endpoints were treatment success, calculated as the percentage of subjects with >70% reduction in pad weight, reduction in incontinence episodes, and quality of life (QoL). 75 women (77%) completed the clinical investigation. No serious adverse events occurred. The treatment group reached a 55% ( ) mean reduction of total leakage compared to the control arm. A subanalysis, involving only leakage during provocation testing (coughing and jumping), showed a 67% ( ) mean reduction of leakage. No significant effect on QoL could be observed. 51% of the women answered “yes” to the question if they would use the device to reduce SUI. The user acceptance of the device was further investigated in four postmarket studies, using an improved device design with a slimmer centerpiece and a thinner handle, while keeping the effect achieving parts of the device unchanged. An average of 74% of the 102 participants in the postmarket studies reported that they were likely to continue using Efemia. The highest user satisfaction was seen in the two studies evaluating the use of Efemia during exercise, where 83% and 88% of the women were likely to continue using Efemia. It can be concluded that Efemia is a safe, well-tolerated, and effective alternative for reducing SUI, both in everyday life and during physical exercise. 1. Introduction Overall success rate, defined as at least 70% reduction in pad weight from the run-in week to the final week (week 3): 42% of the subjects in the TVS arm and 4% of the subjects in the control arm had more than 70% reduction in pad weight with a value = 0.0008 in favour for the TVS group. The clinical investigation TVS1000 confirmed that Efemia Bladder Support is safe and achieves its primary performance objective to reduce involuntary urine leakage with a 55% ( ) mean reduction of leakage compared to the control group. The subanalysis of leakage during the daily provocation tests showed a 67% ( ) mean reduction of leakage. The impact of incontinence on the daily life was measured in TVS2000 and TVS3000 using the validated Incontinence Impact Questionnaire IIQ-7, where the women were asked to grade the impact of their incontinence in 7 areas of everyday life before and after having tried Efemia for 4 weeks. A grading of 0–3 was used, where 0 = not at all, 1 = slightly, 2 = moderately, and 3 = greatly. There was a significant improvement in IIQ-7 scores with a 27% mean decrease in TVS2000 ( ) and a 29% mean decrease in TVS3000 ( ).A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial and four postmarket user acceptance investigations were carried out to document the safety, performance, and user acceptance of Efemia Bladder Support, a novel vaginal inlay for the temporary reduction of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The clinical investigation enrolled 97 women diagnosed with SUI, randomized 3 : 1 to either treatment or standard care (control). The primary endpoint was reduction of urine leakage, measured as change in pad weight baseline week compared with treatment week. Secondary endpoints were treatment success, calculated as the percentage of subjects with >70% reduction in pad weight, reduction in incontinence episodes, and quality of life (QoL). 75 women (77%) completed the clinical investigation. No serious adverse events occurred. The treatment group reached a 55% ( p< 0.001) mean reduction of total leakage compared to the control arm. A subanalysis, involving only leakage during provocation testing (coughing and jumping), showed a 67% ( p< 0.001) mean reduction of leakage. No significant effect on QoL could be observed. 51% of the women answered "yes" to the question if they would use the device to reduce SUI. The user acceptance of the device was further investigated in four postmarket studies, using an improved device design with a slimmer centerpiece and a thinner handle, while keeping the effect achieving parts of the device unchanged. An average of 74% of the 102 participants in the postmarket studies reported that they were likely to continue using Efemia. The highest user satisfaction was seen in the two studies evaluating the use of Efemia during exercise, where 83% and 88% of the women were likely to continue using Efemia. It can be concluded that Efemia is a safe, well-tolerated, and effective alternative for reducing SUI, both in everyday life and during physical exercise. The secondary endpoints for the study were also met. 42% of the subjects in the TVS arm had >70% reduction in pad weight and the number of SUI episodes was reduced by 28%. We understand what it’s like to deal with this condition. You feel limited in what you can do, and feel embarrassed that others will be able to tell. But with the help of Wearever’s discreet incontinence underwear for women you can start to reinvent yourself. Subjects were carefully monitored for the occurrence of adverse events (AE) during the investigation period from randomization to the completion of follow-up. The clinical investigators collected AE information using nonleading questions. Events directly observed or spontaneously volunteered by subjects were also recorded. 2.2.9. Ethical Considerations
My fight now is to get Efemia on prescription. On all internet searches it states that it is available in the UK on NHS prescription. However, my Doctor called me yesterday saying that it is not available on prescription as it is not recommended by NICE. It seems I am getting contradictory information. I’d be grateful to hear of anyone else in the UK getting it on prescription. Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7): IIQ-7 score was reduced with 10% for the TVS group and 12% for the control group. There was no statistical difference between the TVS group and the control group ( ).
Sustainable
The study title is an Open Randomized Controlled Multicenter Clinical Investigation with an Intravaginal Device for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Comparison to Using Standard of Care. 2.2.2. Study Population The primary author and coordinating investigator, Aino Fianu Jonasson, takes responsibility for the integrity of the data. Conflicts of Interest Investigational device, size 30 mm. Left: the design used in the clinical investigation; right: the design used in the postmarket studies. A = support rings, B = midsection, and C = handle. 2.2. Study Design of the Clinical Investigation TVS1000 2.2.1. Study Title Incontinence is the unwanted and involuntary leakage of urine or stool. It affects an estimated 400 million people across the world. The quality of life endpoints in TVS1000 were not met. No clinically significant decrease in the IIQ-7 score, compared to controls, could be detected after 2-week use of the device, while there was a modest but significant decrease of the IIQ-7 score in the two user satisfaction studies TVS2000 and TVS3000, with 27% and 29% reduction, respectively. The published validation of the Swedish form of the IIQ-7 questionnaire reported a strong-to-moderate correlation with treatment satisfaction and reduction of the IIQ-7 score [ 15]. It was therefore surprising to note that there was no significant correlation between any of the treatment satisfaction variables (willingness to continue using or recommending Efemia), and reduction of IIQ-7 scores in the present investigations. In fact, 6 of the 8 women in the TVS3000 study and 5 of the 7 women in the TVS2000 study, with an increase or no change in the IIQ-7 score after treatment, reported that they were likely to continue using Efemia. It is difficult to understand why anyone will want to continue to use Efemia if it has no effect or even worsens the impact of incontinence on their daily life, as measured with IIQ-7. An explanation might be that women with mild SUI cannot relate to the IIQ-7 questions because most of them are likely to use protective pads in situations where they expect to leak. Therefore, their incontinence has very little impact on their ability to perform daily activities. As one of the women comments, “I think the IIQ-7 questions are wrongly designed. Incontinence is unpleasant but it does not affect my ability to do things.” The inadequacy of IIQ-7 for quantifying the objective severity of SUI is confirmed in the publication by Franco et al. where they found no correlation between reduction in urine leakage (1-hour pad weight) and change in IIQ-7 score [ 16]. In future studies, the validated ICQ-SF questionnaire might be better suited for assessing incontinence impact on the quality of life in relation to the use of Efemia. However, it can be clearly concluded that the treatment satisfaction was high and that Efemia facilitated the daily lives of the study participants.
Great Deal 
New Comment