| Literature DB >> 35270480 |
Souhail Alouini1,2, Sejla Memic2, Annabelle Couillandre2,3,4.
Abstract
To determine the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) with or without biofeedback or electrostimulation in reducing urinary incontinence and pelvic floor muscle con-traction in non-pregnant women with urinary incontinence.Entities:
Keywords: biofeedback; electrostimulation; extracorporeal magnetic innervation; mixed urinary incontinence; non-pregnant; pelvic floor muscle training; stress urinary incontinence; urinary incontinence; vaginal cones; whole body vibration training
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35270480 PMCID: PMC8910078 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19052789
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study.
| Criteria | Inclusion | Exclusion |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Women/Female | Post-surgical patients |
| Intervention | Physiotherapy | Other interventions |
| Comparator | Any comparator | Pharmacological |
| Outcome | Muscle strength | Any other clinical or biochemical outcome |
| Study | RCT | Analytical study |
| Language | English | Non-English |
| Year | 2000–Present | Before 2000 |
Figure 1Study selection, flow diagram.
Study and population characteristic.
| Study Name | Country | Study Type | Inclusion Criteria | Sample Randomized | Intervention Groups (Sample Size) | Duration of Study | Study Outcome | Drop out |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gumussoy et al. [ | Turkey | RCT | Women with SIU. | 51 | 26 EMG-BF | 8 weeks | 1 h pad test (grams of urine loss) | 23 |
| Dumoulin et al. [ | Canada | RCT | Stress or mixed UI in older women. | 362 | Group PFMT (178) | 12 weeks | %reduction in UI episodes in 1 year | 43 |
| Weber-Razek et al. [ | Poland | RCT | Women patients with urinary incontinence. | 128 | PFMT (44) | 4 weeks | Urinary incontinence, | 17 |
| Farzinmehr et al. [ | Iran | RCT | Women patients with 4.5-year history of urinary incontinence. | 46 | WBVT (24) | 3 months (13 weeks) | Urinary incontinence, severity, | 3 |
| Chantale et al. 2004 [ | Canada | RCT | Women patients exhibiting symptoms of stress urinary incontinence at least once per week for 3 months or more after their last delivery. | 64 | PFMT (21) | 8 weeks | PFM function, | 2 |
| Hagen et al. [ | UK | RCT | Women patients aged 18 years or older and newly presenting with clinically diagnosed stress or mixed urinary incontinence and urine leakage. | 600 | PFMT + Biofeedback (300) | 24 months (104 weeks) | Incontinence, severity, | 7 |
| Ahlund et al. [ | Sweden | RCT | Women patients having urinary incontinence after 10–16 weeks postpartum. | 98 | PFMT (49) | 6 months (26 weeks) | PFM strength, | 16 |
| Castro et al. [ | Brazil | RCT | Women patients having had urodynamic stress incontinence of at least 3 stress incontinence episodes in a week. | 118 | PFMT (31) | 6 months (26 weeks) | QoL, | 17 |
| Jahromi et al. 2013 [ | Iran | RCT | Women | 50 | PFMT (25) | 2 months (8.5 weeks) | Urinary incontinency, urine leakage, self-esteem, QoL, | 2 |
| Gameiro et al. [ | Brazil | RCT | Women patients having symptoms of SUI and urge incontinence. | 103 | VC (51) | 12 weeks | Urinary leakage, | 0 |
| Wagg et al. [ | Bangladesh | RCT | Women patients having current | 625 | PFMT + Education (335) | 24 weeks | Urinary leakage | 46 |
| Bo et al. [ | Norway | RCT | Women patients having history of stress urinary | 59 | PFMT (29) | 6 months (26 weeks) | Incontinence, symptoms, QOL | 6 |
| McLean et al. [ | Canada | RCT | Women patients having symptoms of SUI with or without urge incontinence. | 40 | PFMT (20) | 12 weeks | Incontinence, urinary flow | 5 |
| Pereira et al. [ | Brazil | RCT | 12-month post-menopausal women patients having at least one episode of SUI symptom. | 45 | PFMT (15) | 12 months (52 weeks) | Urinary leakage, | 4 |
| Leong et al. [ | Hong Kong | RCT | Women patients having a clinical diagnosis of SUI, | 55 | PFMT + BT + Education (27) | 12 weeks | QoL | 0 |
(ExMi, extracorporeal magnetic innervation; WBVT, whole body vibration training; PFM + AMT, pelvic floor muscle + abdominal muscle therapy; PFMT, pelvic floor muscle therapy; ES, electrical stimulation; VC, vaginal cones).
Figure 2Risk of bias for studies as percentage.
Figure 3Cochrane risk of bias for each component across all the studies.
Study outcome.
| Study Name | Scales Used for Measuring Outcomes | Risk of Bias | Age (Years) | Result for Muscle Contraction | Result for Endurance | Result for Urinary Incontinence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gumussoy et al. [ | Pad test, | Some concern. | 50.92 years (SD 8.88). | Pelvic floor muscle contraction force significantly increased in both groups. | Both groups achieved reductions in urine loss during treatment. | |
| Dumoulin et al. [ | %reduction in UI episodes in 1 year, 7-day bladder diary | Low risk. | Age, 67.9 [5.8] years | Significant reduction in leakage episode frequency at 12 weeks and 1 year for both groups’ median percentage reduction in urinary incontinence episodes at 1 year of 70% in individual PFMT compared with a 74% reduction in group-based PFMT. | ||
| Weber-Razek et al. [ | RUIS, KHQ | Low risk. | Mean (Range): | Statistical improvement in urinary incontinence severity in PFMT | ||
| Farzinmehr et al. [ | VAS, I-QOL | Low risk. | Range: | WBVT was effective in PFM strength similar to PFMT. | WBVT was effective in reducing the severity of incontinence similar to PFMT. | |
| Dumoulin et al. [ | Pad test, VAS, UDI, IIQ, | Some concern. | <45 | No significant improvement was observed between the PFMT, PFM + AT, and control group. | Significant improvement was observed in the PFMT and PFM + AT group compared with control. | |
| Hagen et al. [ | ICIQ-UI SF, PGII | Some concern. | Mean (SD) | No significant difference was found between the PFMT + biofeedback (8.5%) and PFMT group (6%) at 6 months. | No clinical or significant difference was observed between PFMT + biofeedback and | |
| Ahlund et al. [ | BFLUT Symptoms Module | Low risk | Mean (SD) | Muscle strength: No statistically significant difference was observed between PFMT and | No significant difference was observed between PFMT and Control groups. However, there was an increase in endurance from baseline in both groups. | Significant improvement was observed in both PFMT and |
| Castro et al. [ | Pad test | Low risk. | Mean ± SD | Significant improvement was observed in the PFMT compared with the ES and VC groups. | Significant decrease in pad weight or improvement in urinary leakage in PFMT, ES, and VC group compared with control. | |
| Jahromi et al. [ | QUID | High risk. | 60–74 years | Significant difference was observed between the PFMT and the control group for frequency of urine leakage. | ||
| Gameiro et al. [ | VAS | Low risk. | Mean | No statistical difference | Significant improvement was observed from baseline in both the groups at 6 months but not at 12 months. NS difference | |
| Wagg et al. [ | EuroQoL Questionnaire | Some concern. | Mean (SD) | A significant decrease in leakage was observed in the PFMT + education group compared with the only education group. | ||
| Bo et al. [ | QoLS-N | High risk. | Mean (SD) | Significant improvement in sex-life, social life, and physical activity in PFMT group. | ||
| McLean et al. [ | Pad test | High risk. | Mean ± SD | Significant improvements | ||
| Pereira et al. [ | Pad test | Low risk. | Median (min, max) | Significant decrease in urinary leakage in PFMT and VC group from baseline compared with the control group. | ||
| Leong et al. [ | IIQ-SF-7 | Some concern. | Mean (± SD) | Significant reduction in urinary leakage (>90%) in the PFMT + BT + education group compared with the education group (7.2%). |
(VAS, Visual Analogue Scale; UI-7, Urinary Incontinence; IIQ-SF-7, Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-Short form; UDI-6, Urogenital Distress Inventory; QoLS-N, Norwegian version of the Quality of Life Scale; B-FLUTS, Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Module; EQ5D-; ICIQ, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-urinary incontinence; QUID, Questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnoses; OGS, Oxford Grading Scale; I-QOL, Incontinence quality of life; RUIS, Revised Urinary Incontinence Scale; KHQ, King’s Health Questionnaire).