Advances in healthcare technology for continence have historically been limited compared to other areas of medicine, reflecting the complexities of the condition and social stigma which act as a barrier to participation. This whitepaper has been developed to inspire and direct the engineering science community towards research opportunities that exist for continence technologies that address unmet needs in diagnosis, treatment and long-term management. Our aim is to pinpoint key challenges and highlight related research opportunities for novel technological advances. To do so, we draw on experience and expertise from academics, clinicians, patients and patient groups linked to continence healthcare. This is presented in four areas of consideration: the clinical pathway, patient perspective, research challenges and effective innovation. In each we introduce seminal research, background information and demonstrative case-studies, before discussing their relevance to engineering science researchers who are interested in approaching this overlooked but vital area of healthcare.
WhiteheadWEBorrudLGoodePSet al. Fecal incontinence in US adults: epidemiology and risk factors. Gastroenterology2009; 137(2): 512–517, 517.e1–517.e2.
2.
HunskaarSArnoldEPBurgioKet al. Epidemiology and natural history of urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct2000; 11(5): 301–319.
3.
MinassianVADrutzHPAl-BadrA.Urinary incontinence as a worldwide problem. Int J Gynaecol Obstet2003; 82(3): 327–338.
4.
RajindrajithSDevanarayanaNMBenningaMA.Review article: faecal incontinence in children: epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical evaluation and management. Aliment Pharmacol Ther2013; 37(1): 37–48.
5.
FaderM.Review of current technologies for urinary incontinence: strengths and limitations. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2003; 217(4): 233–241.
Farrell-BeckJKiddLK.The roles of health professionals in the development and dissemination of women’s sanitary products, 1880-1940. J Hist Med Allied Sci1996; 51(3): 325–352.
8.
Zohuriaan-MehrMJOmidianHDoroudianiSet al. Advances in non-hygienic applications of superabsorbent hydrogel materials. J Mater Sci2010; 45(21): 5711–5735.
9.
PalitSLunnissPJScottSM.The physiology of human defecation. Dig Dis Sci2012; 57(6): 1445–1464.
DiamantNEKammMAWaldAet al. AGA technical review on anorectal testing techniques. Gastroenterology1999; 116(3): 735–760.
12.
SunWMDonnellyTCReadNW.Utility of a combined test of anorectal manometry, electromyography, and sensation in determining the mechanism of ‘idiopathic’ faecal incontinence. Gut1992; 33(6): 807–813.
SohJSLeeHJJungKWet al. The diagnostic value of a digital rectal examination compared with high-resolution anorectal manometry in patients with chronic constipation and fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenterol2015; 110(8): 1197–1204.
15.
KumarSSharmaPAndreisekG.Does conventional defecography has a role to play in evaluation of evacuatory disorders in Indian population?Indian J Radiol Imaging2013; 23(1): 92–96.
Van KoughnettJAMWexnerSD. Current management of fecal incontinence: choosing amongst treatment options to optimize outcomes. World J Gastroenterol2013; 19(48): 9216–9230.
21.
NortonCWhiteheadWEBlissDZet al. Management of fecal incontinence in adults. Neurourol Urodyn2010; 29(1): 199–206.
22.
BrownSRWadhawanHNelsonRL.Surgery for faecal incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2013; 7: CD001757.
23.
FerranteKLKayAKirbyAC.Native tissue surgery for prolapse versus graft/mesh use: current trends in reconstructive surgery. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep2016; 5(2): 124–130.
KaiserAMOrangioGRZutshiMet al. Current status: new technologies for the treatment of patients with fecal incontinence. Surg Endosc2014; 28(8): 2277–2301.
26.
CollertonJJaggerCYadegarfarMEet al. Deconstructing complex multimorbidity in the very old: findings from the Newcastle 85+ study. BioMed Res Int2016; 2016: 8745670.
27.
BanerjeeAArmstrongP.Centring care: explaining regulatory tensions in residential care for older persons. Stud Polit Econ2015; 95(1): 7–28.
28.
GoodmanCNortonCBuswellMet al. Managing Faecal INcontinence in people with advanced dementia resident in Care Homes (FINCH) study: a realist synthesis of the evidence. Health Technol Assess2017; 21(42): 1–220.
29.
BharuchaAEZinsmeisterARLockeGRet al. Symptoms and quality of life in community women with fecal incontinence. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol2006; 4(8): 1004–1009.
30.
MangeraAMarzoAHeronNet al. Development of two electronic bladder diaries: a patient and healthcare professionals pilot study. Neurourol Urodynam2014; 33: 1101–1109.
31.
LeighRTurnbergL.Faecal incontinence: the unvoiced symptom. Lancet1982; 319(8285): 1349–1351.
32.
CollingsSNortonC.Women’s experiences of faecal incontinence: a study. Br J Community Nurs2004; 9(12): 520–523.
33.
Peden-McAlpineCBlissDBeckerBet al. The experience of community-living men managing fecal incontinence. Rehabil Nurs2012; 37(6): 298–306.
34.
FischerNChurchPLyonsJet al. A qualitative exploration of the experiences of children with spina bifida and their parents around incontinence and social participation. Child Care Health Dev2015; 41(6): 954–962.
35.
PeakeSMandersonL.The constraints of a normal life: the management of urinary incontinence by middle aged women. Women Health2003; 37(3): 37–51.
36.
GarciaJACrockerJWymanJFet al. Breaking the cycle of stigmatization: managing the stigma of incontinence in social interactions. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs2005; 32(1): 38–52.
37.
HoogsteynsMvan der HorstH.How to live with a taboo instead of ‘breaking it’. Alternative empowerment strategies of people with incontinence. Health Sociol Rev2015; 24(1): 38–47.
38.
LinkBGPhelanJC.Stigma and its public health implications. Lancet2006; 367(9509): 528–529.
39.
CalvilloJRománIRoaLM.How technology is empowering patients? A literature review. Health Expect2015; 18(5): 643–652.
40.
WildeMHFairbanksEParshallRet al. A web-based self-management intervention for intermittent catheter users. Urol Nurs2015; 35(3): 127–138.
41.
AbramsPAnderssonKEBirderLet al. Fourth international consultation on incontinence recommendations of the international scientific committee: evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence. Neurourol Urodynam2010; 29: 213–240.
42.
JohnWSWallisMGriffithsSet al. Daily-living management of urinary incontinence: a synthesis of the literature. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs2010; 37(1): 80–90.
43.
MacKayKHemmettL.Needs assessment of women with urinary incontinence in a district health authority. Br J Gen Pract2001; 51(471): 801–804.
44.
McKenzieSSt JohnWWallisMet al. Men’s management of urinary incontinence in daily living: implications for practice. Int J Urol Nurs2013; 7(1): 43–52.
45.
RozenskyRHTovianSMGartleyCBet al. A quality of life survey of individuals with urinary incontinence who visit a self-help website: implications for those seeking healthcare information. J Clin Psychol Med Settings2013; 20(3): 275–283.
46.
LeeJTMadoffRDRockwoodTH.Quality-of-life measures in fecal incontinence: is validation valid?Dis Colon Rectum2015; 58(3): 352–357.
47.
FultzNHHerzogAR.Self-reported social and emotional impact of urinary incontinence. J Am Geriatr Soc2001; 49(7): 892–899.
48.
SinclairAJRamsayIN.The psychosocial impact of urinary incontinence in women. Obstet Gynecol2011; 13(3): 143–148.
49.
NgK-SSivakumaranYNassarNet al. Fecal incontinence: community prevalence and associated factors – a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum2015; 58(12): 1194–1209.
50.
KarbageSALSantosZMSAFrotaMAet al. Quality of life of Brazilian women with urinary incontinence and the impact on their sexual function. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol2016; 201: 56–60.
51.
MinerPB.Economic and personal impact of fecal and urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology2004; 126: S8–S13.
52.
DrennanVMColeLIliffeS.A taboo within a stigma? A qualitative study of managing incontinence with people with dementia living at home. BMC Geriatr2011; 11: 75.
53.
GetliffeKFaderMCottendenAet al. Absorbent products for incontinence: ‘treatment effects’ and impact on quality of life. J Clin Nurs2007; 16(10): 1936–1945.
54.
HeronJGrzedaMTvon GontardAet al. Trajectories of urinary incontinence in childhood and bladder and bowel symptoms in adolescence: prospective cohort study. BMJ Open2017; 7(3): e014238.
55.
CushingCCMartinez-LeoBBischoffAet al. Health-related quality of life and parental stress in children with fecal incontinence: a normative comparison. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr2016; 63(6): 633–636.
DibleyLCoggraveMMcClurgDet al. ‘It’s just horrible’: a qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of bowel dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol2017; 264(7): 1354–1361.
58.
Di RosaMLamuraG. The impact of incontinence management on informal caregivers’ quality of life. Aging Clin Exp Res2016; 28(1): 89–97.
59.
von GontardAde JongTPVMRantellAet al. Do we manage incontinence in children and adults with special needs adequately? ICI-RS 2014. Neurourol Urodyn2016; 35(2): 304–306.
60.
HillaryCJSlovakMMcCarthyAet al. Recent developments in technology for the assessment and management of incontinence. J Med Eng Technol2015; 39(7): 434–440.
61.
GibsonWWaggA.Incontinence in the elderly, ‘normal’ ageing, or unaddressed pathology?Nat Rev Urol2017; 14(7): 440–448.
62.
ShinGHTotoELScheyR.Pregnancy and postpartum bowel changes: constipation and fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenterol2015; 110(4): 521–529.
AbdulazizMDeeganEGKavanaghAet al. Advances in basic science methodologies for clinical diagnosis in female stress urinary incontinence. Can Urol Assoc J2017; 11(6, Suppl 2): S117–S120.
65.
KumarVCrossRLChess-WilliamsRet al. Recent advances in basic science for overactive bladder. Curr Opin Urol2005; 15(4): 222–226.
66.
SangsterPMorleyR.Biomaterials in urinary incontinence and treatment of their complications. Indian J Urol2010; 26(2): 221–229.
67.
BemelmansB.The use of biomaterials in incontinence surgery. Eur Urol Suppl2002; 1(10): 12–16.
68.
DenstedtJ (ed.). Biomaterials and tissue engineering in urology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.
69.
KasiADPergialiotisVPerreaDNet al. Polyacrylamide hydrogel (Bulkamid®) for stress urinary incontinence in women: a systematic review of the literature. Int Urogynecology J2016; 27(3): 367–375.
70.
National Research Council (U.S.) (ed.). Polymer science and engineering: the shifting research frontiers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1994.
71.
PakravanFHelmesC.Magnetic anal sphincter augmentation in patients with severe fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum2015; 58(1): 109–114.
72.
SinghaPLocklinJHandaH.A review of the recent advances in antimicrobial coatings for urinary catheters. Acta Biomater2017; 50(Suppl C): 20–40.
73.
LawrenceELTurnerIG.Materials for urinary catheters: a review of their history and development in the UK. Med Eng Phys2005; 27(6): 443–453.
74.
FisherLEHookALAshrafWet al. Biomaterial modification of urinary catheters with antimicrobials to give long-term broadspectrum antibiofilm activity. J Control Release2015; 202(Suppl C): 57–64.
75.
NiemczykAEl FrayMFranklinSE.Friction behaviour of hydrophilic lubricious coatings for medical device applications. Tribol Int2015; 89(Suppl C): 54–61.
76.
FullertonJNFrodshamGCMDayRM.3D printing for the many, not the few. Nat Biotechnol2014; 32(11): 1086–1087.
77.
TanakaASuematsuRSakamotoHet al. Self-powered wireless urinary-incontinence sensor determines time for diaper change from spacing between sensing signals. In: Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE sensors, Orlando, FL, 30 October–3 November 2016, pp.1–3. New York: IEEE.
78.
TanakaAUtsunomiyaFDousekiT.A wireless self-powered urinary incontinence sensor system. SICE J Control Meas Syst Integr2012; 5(1): 8–12.
79.
Ortiz PérezAKallfaß-de FrenesVFilbertAet al. Odor-sensing system to support social participation of people suffering from incontinence. Sensors2016; 17(1): 58.
80.
JoungY-H.Development of implantable medical devices: from an engineering perspective. Int Neurourol J2013; 17(3): 98–106.
81.
DakurahMNKooCChoiWet al. Implantable bladder sensors: a methodological review. Int Neurourol J2015; 19(3): 133–141.
82.
MelgaardJRijkhoffNJM. Detecting urinary bladder contractions: methods and devices. J Sens Technol2014; 4(4): 165–176.
83.
YuLKimBJMengE.Chronically implanted pressure sensors: challenges and state of the field. Sensors2014; 14(11): 20620–20644.
84.
FattoriniEBrusaTGingertCet al. Artificial muscle devices: innovations and prospects for fecal incontinence treatment. Ann Biomed Eng2016; 44(5): 1355–1369.
85.
JinWYanGWuHet al. Preliminary study of a novel puborectalis-like artificial anal sphincter. Artif Organs2017; 41: 845–851.
86.
SteinhublSRMuseEDTopolEJ.Can mobile health technologies transform health care?JAMA2013; 310(22): 2395–2396.
87.
AsklundINyströmESjöströmMet al. Mobile app for treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Neurourol Urodyn2017; 36(5): 1369–1376.
88.
SjöströmMLindholmLSamuelssonE.Mobile app for treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Med Internet Res2017; 19(5): e154.
89.
ParmantoBPramanaGYuDXet al. iMHere: a novel mHealth system for supporting self-care in management of complex and chronic conditions. JMIR MHealth UHealth2013; 1(2): e10.
90.
KattanMW.When and how to use informatics tools in caring for urologic patients. Nat Clin Pract Urol2005; 2(4): 183–190.
91.
FrudingerAPfeiferJPaedeJet al. Autologous skeletal-muscle-derived cell injection for anal incontinence due to obstetric trauma: a 5-year follow-up of an initial study of 10 patients. Colorectal Dis2015; 17(9): 794–801.
92.
PetersKMDmochowskiRRCarrLKet al. Autologous muscle derived cells for treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. J Urol2014; 192(2): 469–476.
93.
HartMLIzetaAHerrera-ImbrodaBet al. Cell therapy for stress urinary incontinence. Tissue Eng Part B Rev2015; 21(4): 365–376.
94.
ParmarNDayRM.TIPS to manipulate myogenesis: retention of myoblast differentiation capacity using microsphere culture. Eur Cell Mater2015; 30: 41–49; discussion 49–50.
95.
ParmarNAhmadiRDayRM.A novel method for differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells into smooth muscle-like cells on clinically deliverable thermally induced phase separation microspheres. Tissue Eng Part C Methods2015; 21(4): 404–412.
96.
HeckerLBaarKDennisRGet al. Development of a three-dimensional physiological model of the internal anal sphincter bioengineered in vitro from isolated smooth muscle cells. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol2005; 289(2): G188–G196.
97.
SomaraSGilmontRRDennisRGet al. Bioengineered internal anal sphincter derived from isolated human internal anal sphincter smooth muscle cells. Gastroenterology2009; 137(1): 53–61.
98.
HashishMRaghavanSSomaraSet al. Surgical implantation of a bioengineered internal anal sphincter. J Pediatr Surg2010; 45(1): 52–58.
99.
RaghavanSGilmontRRMiyasakaEAet al. Successful implantation of bioengineered, intrinsically innervated, human internal anal sphincter. Gastroenterology2011; 141(1): 310–319.
100.
RaghavanSMiyasakaEAGilmontRRet al. Perianal implantation of bioengineered human internal anal sphincter constructs intrinsically innervated with human neural progenitor cells. Surgery2014; 155(4): 668–674.
101.
BohlJLZakhemEBitarKN.Successful treatment of passive fecal incontinence in an animal model using engineered biosphincters: a 3-month follow-up study. Stem Cells Transl Med2017; 6(9): 1795–1802.
HarshadKJunMParkSet al. An electromagnetic cell-stretching device for mechanotransduction studies of olfactory ensheathing cells. Biomed Microdevices2016; 18(3): 45.
104.
WoolfSH.The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA2008; 299(2): 211–213.
105.
CallardFRoseDWykesT.Close to the bench as well as at the bedside: involving service users in all phases of translational research. Health Expect2012; 15(4): 389–400.
106.
WallLLBrownD.The perils of commercially driven surgical innovation. Am J Obstet Gynecol2010; 202(1): 30.e1–30.e4.
107.
WrightBEmmanuelAAthanasakosEet al. Women’s views on autologous cell-based therapy for post-obstetric incontinence. Regen Med2016; 11(2): 169–180.
108.
AbramsPCardozoLKhourySet al. (eds). Incontinence: 5th international consultation on incontinence, Paris, February 2012. Paris: ICUD-European Association of Urology; 2013.
