Keyla Mara Dos Santos1, Thuane Da Roza2,3, Luis Mochizuki4, Eliane Regina Mendoza Arbieto2, Soraia Cristina Tonon da Luz2. 1. Department of Physiotherapy, College of Health and Sport Science, Santa Catarina State University (CEFID/UDESC), Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. keylasantosfisio@gmail.com. 2. Department of Physiotherapy, College of Health and Sport Science, Santa Catarina State University (CEFID/UDESC), Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 3. Associated Laboratory for Energy, Transports and Aeronautics (LAETA), Institute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI); Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 4. Escola de Artes Ciências e Humanidades, University of Sao Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Studies have shown that there is a co-contraction between the pelvic floor and abdominal muscles. This study aimed to evaluate pelvic floor and abdominal muscle function in continent and incontinent female athletes and to investigate the association between these muscle groups. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Forty nulliparous professional female athletes who competed at the municipal level or above participated in this study. All participants underwent a pelvic floor muscle (PFM) and abdominal muscle assessment. PFM function and strength were assessed using the modified Oxford Scale and a perineometer. Abdominal muscle function and strength were assessed using a 4-Pro isokinetic dynamometer. To assess athletes' urinary continence, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short-Form (ICIQ-UI-SF) was used. RESULTS: There was a positive association between PFM and abdominal muscle strength among the incontinent athletes (p = 0.006; r = 0.577). The incontinent athletes had greater PFM strength than the continent athletes (p = 0.02). There was no difference in abdominal muscle function between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found that incontinent athletes have greater PFM strength than continent athletes. This suggests that urinary incontinence in this population is not due to PFM weakness. The positive association between abdominal and PFM strengths in incontinent athletes may be due to frequent co-contraction between these muscle groups.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Studies have shown that there is a co-contraction between the pelvic floor and abdominal muscles. This study aimed to evaluate pelvic floor and abdominal muscle function in continent and incontinent female athletes and to investigate the association between these muscle groups. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Forty nulliparous professional female athletes who competed at the municipal level or above participated in this study. All participants underwent a pelvic floor muscle (PFM) and abdominal muscle assessment. PFM function and strength were assessed using the modified Oxford Scale and a perineometer. Abdominal muscle function and strength were assessed using a 4-Pro isokinetic dynamometer. To assess athletes' urinary continence, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short-Form (ICIQ-UI-SF) was used. RESULTS: There was a positive association between PFM and abdominal muscle strength among the incontinent athletes (p = 0.006; r = 0.577). The incontinent athletes had greater PFM strength than the continent athletes (p = 0.02). There was no difference in abdominal muscle function between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found that incontinent athletes have greater PFM strength than continent athletes. This suggests that urinary incontinence in this population is not due to PFM weakness. The positive association between abdominal and PFM strengths in incontinent athletes may be due to frequent co-contraction between these muscle groups.
Authors: Abdul H Sultan; Ash Monga; Joseph Lee; Anton Emmanuel; Christine Norton; Giulio Santoro; Tracy Hull; Bary Berghmans; Stuart Brody; Bernard T Haylen Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Thuane Da Roza; Sofia Brandão; Teresa Mascarenhas; Renato Natal Jorge; José Alberto Duarte Journal: Clin J Sport Med Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 3.638