PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 25, 2026Indian Journal of Urology0 citationsOpen Access

Interventions for giggle incontinence: A scoping review of therapeutic strategies and outcomes

View Full Paper
RBRutuben Harshadbhai BhavsarKMKritagya MalikPKPalani G. Kumar

Key Points

  • This review aims to synthesize evidence on managing giggle incontinence (GI) among adolescents, focusing on treatment strategies.
  • Conducted a scoping review using Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.
  • Followed guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.
  • Utilized the Population, Concept, Context framework for comprehensive literature search.
  • Extracted treatment outcomes and follow-up data from identified studies.
  • Nine studies met inclusion criteria out of 72 records.
  • Common interventions included pharmacologic treatments, primarily methylphenidate, and nonpharmacologic approaches like biofeedback and behavioral modifications.
  • Follow-up data indicated significant positive effects from both intervention types.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: Giggle incontinence (GI) is a rare type of urinary incontinence that affects children and adolescents, impacting their quality of life by causing social isolation, reduced self-confidence, and low self-esteem. To counteract the symptoms of GI, various treatment approaches have been described, but there is a dearth of reporting on their effectiveness. Objective: This review aims to synthesize evidence on the management of GI in the adolescent population, focusing on pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines, along with the Population, Concept, Context framework, to perform a comprehensive search across major databases and gray literature. Treatment outcomes and follow-up data were extracted. Results: Of the 72 records, 9 studies met the inclusion criteria, in which the commonly used interventions were pharmacologic (mainly methylphenidate MPH) and nonpharmacologic (biofeedback, behavioral modifications). Studies explored the effectiveness of these interventions and found positive outcomes. Follow-up showed a significant effect of both the types of interventions. Conclusions: GI remains under-recognized in the adolescent population despite its effects on psychological and urological health. A multidisciplinary approach targeting the GI can help improve outcomes. This review provides insights about the use of various nonpharmacological therapies, such as biofeedback and behavioral therapy, and pharmacological therapies in the form of MPH to improve GI. Nonpharmacological approaches are low-risk and can be adapted as the primary treatment. Future research with planned methodology to compare the treatment efficacy is needed to improve the outcomes.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bhavsar et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/699e9143f5123be5ed04eb3fhttps://doi.org/10.4103/iju.iju_401_25
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The effect of methylphenidate for giggle incontinence in children2023 · 8 citations
  2. 2Evaluation of the efficacies of methylphenidate and biofeedback treatments in giggle incontinence: One-year follow-up study2021 · 15 citations
  3. 3Giggle incontinence: a scoping review2024 · 5 citations
  4. 4Giggle incontinence: Evolution of concept and treatment2017 · 27 citations
  5. 5Urodynamic characterization of giggle incontinence in children2021 · 6 citations