Aysun Özlü1, Necmettin Yıldız1, Özer Öztekin2. 1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine, Denizli, Turkey. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine, Denizli, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of intravaginal pressure biofeedback (P-BF) and perineal electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) assistedpelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercises in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). MATERIAL AND METHODS:Fifty-three women with SUI were randomized into three groups as follows: the Group 1 received PFM home exercise program alone (n:18); the Group 2 received PFM home exercise program plus intravaginal P-BF assisted PFM exercise program (n:17); and the Group 3 received PFM home exercise program plusperineal EMG-BF assisted PFM exercise program (n:18). Subjects were also assessed with the 1-h pad test (severity of incontinence), perineometer (PFM strength), social activity index (SAI), IIQ7 (quality of life associated with incontinence), treatment success (cure and improvement rate) and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: A statistically significant improvement was found in all parameters for all groups at 4th week and 8th week compared to the baseline values. It was found that severity of incontinence, PFM strength, and SAI scores were significantly improved in both BF groups compared to the Group 1 at 8th week. Also, statistically higher cure and improvement rate and treatment satisfaction values were detected in both BF groups compared to the Group 1. There was no statistically significant difference between Group 2 and Group 3 in all parameters evaluated at the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that both the home exercises plus intravaginal P-BF and home exercises plus perineal EMG-BF are superior to home exercises in women with SUI. Intravaginal P-BF and perineal EMG-BF were similarly effective and they can be used as their alternatives.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of intravaginal pressure biofeedback (P-BF) and perineal electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) assisted pelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercises in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-three women with SUI were randomized into three groups as follows: the Group 1 received PFM home exercise program alone (n:18); the Group 2 received PFM home exercise program plus intravaginal P-BF assisted PFM exercise program (n:17); and the Group 3 received PFM home exercise program plus perineal EMG-BF assisted PFM exercise program (n:18). Subjects were also assessed with the 1-h pad test (severity of incontinence), perineometer (PFM strength), social activity index (SAI), IIQ7 (quality of life associated with incontinence), treatment success (cure and improvement rate) and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: A statistically significant improvement was found in all parameters for all groups at 4th week and 8th week compared to the baseline values. It was found that severity of incontinence, PFM strength, and SAI scores were significantly improved in both BF groups compared to the Group 1 at 8th week. Also, statistically higher cure and improvement rate and treatment satisfaction values were detected in both BF groups compared to the Group 1. There was no statistically significant difference between Group 2 and Group 3 in all parameters evaluated at the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that both the home exercises plus intravaginal P-BF and home exercises plus perineal EMG-BF are superior to home exercises in women with SUI. Intravaginal P-BF and perineal EMG-BF were similarly effective and they can be used as their alternatives.
Authors: Suzanne Hagen; Carol Bugge; Sarah G Dean; Andrew Elders; Jean Hay-Smith; Mary Kilonzo; Doreen McClurg; Mohamed Abdel-Fattah; Wael Agur; Federico Andreis; Joanne Booth; Maria Dimitrova; Nicola Gillespie; Cathryn Glazener; Aileen Grant; Karen L Guerrero; Lorna Henderson; Marija Kovandzic; Alison McDonald; John Norrie; Nicole Sergenson; Susan Stratton; Anne Taylor; Louise R Williams Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Suzanne Hagen; Andrew Elders; Susan Stratton; Nicole Sergenson; Carol Bugge; Sarah Dean; Jean Hay-Smith; Mary Kilonzo; Maria Dimitrova; Mohamed Abdel-Fattah; Wael Agur; Jo Booth; Cathryn Glazener; Karen Guerrero; Alison McDonald; John Norrie; Louise R Williams; Doreen McClurg Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-10-14