INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adding voluntary pelvic floor muscle contraction (PFMC) to a Pilates exercise program in sedentary nulliparous women. METHODS:Fifty-seven healthy nulliparous and physically inactive women were randomized to a Pilates exercise program (PEP) with or without PFMC. Forty-eight women concluded this study (24 participants for each group). Each woman was evaluated before and after the PEP, by a physiotherapist and an urogynecologist (UG). Neither of the professionals was revealed to them. This physiotherapist measured their pelvic floor muscle strength by using both a perineometer (Peritron) and vaginal palpation (Oxford Scale). The UG, who performed 3D perineal ultrasound examinations, collected their data and evaluated the results for pubovisceral muscle thickness and the levator hiatus area (LA). Both professionals were blinded to the group allocation. The protocol for both groups consisted of 24 bi-weekly 1-h individual sessions of Pilates exercises, developed by another physiotherapist who specializes in PFM rehabilitation and the Pilates technique. RESULTS: The PEP+ PFMC group showed significantly greater strength improvements than the PEP group when comparing the Oxford scale, vaginal pressure and pubovisceral muscle thickness during contraction measurements at baseline and post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that adding a voluntary PFMC to a Pilates exercise program is more effective than Pilates alone in improving PFM strength in sedentary nulliparous women.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adding voluntary pelvic floor muscle contraction (PFMC) to a Pilates exercise program in sedentary nulliparous women. METHODS: Fifty-seven healthy nulliparous and physically inactive women were randomized to a Pilates exercise program (PEP) with or without PFMC. Forty-eight women concluded this study (24 participants for each group). Each woman was evaluated before and after the PEP, by a physiotherapist and an urogynecologist (UG). Neither of the professionals was revealed to them. This physiotherapist measured their pelvic floor muscle strength by using both a perineometer (Peritron) and vaginal palpation (Oxford Scale). The UG, who performed 3D perineal ultrasound examinations, collected their data and evaluated the results for pubovisceral muscle thickness and the levator hiatus area (LA). Both professionals were blinded to the group allocation. The protocol for both groups consisted of 24 bi-weekly 1-h individual sessions of Pilates exercises, developed by another physiotherapist who specializes in PFM rehabilitation and the Pilates technique. RESULTS: The PEP+ PFMC group showed significantly greater strength improvements than the PEP group when comparing the Oxford scale, vaginal pressure and pubovisceral muscle thickness during contraction measurements at baseline and post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that adding a voluntary PFMC to a Pilates exercise program is more effective than Pilates alone in improving PFM strength in sedentary nulliparous women.
Authors: Tanner J Coleman; Ingrid E Nygaard; Dannielle N Holder; Marlene J Egger; Robert Hitchcock Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jane T Hein; Thomas M Rieck; Heather A Dunfee; Danielle P Johnson; Jennifer A Ferguson; Deborah J Rhodes Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2020-01-09 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Enaiane Cristina Menezes; Franciele da Silva Pereira; Rafaela Maria Porto; Felipe Fank; Giovana Zarpellon Mazo Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-10-07 Impact factor: 1.932