Purpose of review: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common global condition that has been noted to disproportionately affect women. In this review, the authors present discussion of factors contributing to cost of care and various modalities of cost-effective care for UI for female patients.
Recent findings: We found insurance and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs strongly impact of costs for patients. Further, in evaluation of UI, diagnosis can be a costly multi-step process for effective treatment. Treatment can be multimodal, including non-surgical (e.g., pessary, vaginal insert, pelvic floor muscle training, or PFMT), of which PFMT is a cost-effective, effective, and accessible treatment. Pharmacologic management is generally second-line for overactive bladder, but anti-muscarinic drugs and beta-3 agonists are cost-effective depending on willingness-to-pay and the health system in which they are acquired, respectively. Surgical management is considered the most cost-effective treatment as willingness-to-pay increased, with minimally invasive slings being the mainstay. Other relatively novel treatments are also discussed (e.g., EMSELLA) but require further research. Additionally, we discuss systematic barriers in decisions to seek care for urinary incontinence. Urologists are key agents in treating UI for their female patients, and seeking cost-effective options for treatment remains pivotal for quality care.
Keywords: Cost-effective care; Financial toxicity; Overactive bladder; Urinary incontinence; Women’s health.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.