Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women.

BackgroundFoot musculoskeletal deficits are seldom addressed by preventive medicine despite their high prevalence in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.AIM: To investigate the effects of strengthening, stretching, and functional training on foot rollover process during gait.MethodsA two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial with a blinded assessor was designed. Fifty-five patients diagnosed with diabetic polyneuropathy, 45 to 65 years-old were recruited. Exercises for foot-ankle and gait training were administered twice a week, for 12 weeks, to 26 patients assigned to the intervention group, while 29 patients assigned to control group received recommended standard medical care: pharmacological treatment for diabetes and foot care instructions. Both groups were assessed after 12 weeks, and the intervention group at follow-up (24 weeks). Primary outcomes involved foot rollover changes during gait, including peak pressure (PP). Secondary outcomes involved time-to-peak pressure (TPP) and pressure–time integral (PTI) in six foot-areas, mean center of pressure (COP) velocity, ankle kinematics and kinetics in the sagittal plane, intrinsic and extrinsic muscle function, and functional tests of foot and ankle.ResultsEven though the intervention group primary outcome (PP) showed a not statistically significant change under the six foot areas, intention-to-treat comparisons yielded softening of heel strike (delayed heel TPP, p=.03), better eccentric control of forefoot contact (decrease in ankle extensor moment, p<.01; increase in function of ankle dorsiflexion, p<.05), earlier lateral forefoot contact with respect to medial forefoot (TPP anticipation, p<.01), and increased participation of hallux (increased PP and PTI, p=.03) and toes (increase in PTI, medium effect size). A slower COP mean velocity (p=.05), and an increase in overall foot and ankle function (p<.05) were also observed. In most cases, the values returned to baseline after the follow-up (p<.05).ConclusionsIntervention discreetly changed foot rollover towards a more physiological process, supported by improved plantar pressure distribution and better functional condition of the foot ankle complex. Continuous monitoring of the foot status and patient education are necessary, and can contribute to preserving the integrity of foot muscles and joints impaired by polyneuropathy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01207284, registered in 20th September 2010.

Background: Pelvic floor muscle training is the most commonly used physical therapy treatment for women with urinary incontinence. Objectives: To assess the effects of Pelvic floor muscle training for women with urinary incontinence in comparison to a control treatment and to summarize relevant economic findings. Methods: Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialized Register (February 12, 2018). Selection criteria: Randomized or quasi-randomized trials in women with stress, urgency or mixed urinary incontinence (symptoms, signs, or urodynamic). Data collection and analysis: Trials were independently assessed by at least two reviewers authors and subgrouped by urinary incontinence type. Quality of evidence was assessed by adopting the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results: The review included thirty-one trials involving 1817 women from 14 countries. Overall, trials were small to moderate size, and many were at moderate risk of bias. There was considerable variation in the intervention's content and duration. Based on data available, we can be confident that Pelvic floor muscle training can cure or improve symptoms of stress and all other types of urinary incontinence. It may reduce the number of leakage episodes and the quantity of leakage, while improving reported symptoms and quality of life. Women were more satisfied with Pelvic floor muscle training, while those in control groups were more likely to seek further treatment. Long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Pelvic floor muscle training needs to be further researched. ଝ This paper is part of a Special Issue on Women's Health Physical Therapy. ଝଝ This article is based on a Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR)

; for the Urinary Incontinence and Aging Study Group IMPORTANCE Urinary incontinence is one of the most prevalent health concerns experienced by older women (aged Ն60 years). Individual pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is the recommended first-line treatment for stress or mixed urinary incontinence in women, but human and financial resources limit its delivery. Whether group-based PFMT performs as well as individual PFMT in this population remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy of group-based PFMT relative to individual PFMT for urinary incontinence in older women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Group Rehabilitation or Individual Physiotherapy (GROUP) study is a single-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial conducted in 2 Canadian research centers, from July 1, 2012, to June 2, 2018. A total of 362 community-dwelling women aged 60 years or older with symptoms of stress or mixed urinary incontinence were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS After an individual session conducted to learn how to contract pelvic floor muscles, participants completed 12-week PFMT as part of a group of 8 women (n = 178) or in individual sessions (n = 184). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome measure was the percentage reduction in urinary incontinence episodes at 1 year, as reported in a 7-day bladder diary and relative to pretreatment baseline. Secondary outcomes included lower urinary tract-related signs, symptoms, and quality of life immediately following treatment and at 1 year. Per-protocol analysis was used. RESULTS Among 362 women who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [5.8] years), 319 women (88%) completed the 1-year follow-up and were included in the per-protocol analysis. Median percentage reduction in urinary incontinence episodes was 70% (95% CI, 44%-89%) in individual PFMT compared with 74% (95% CI, 46%-86%) in group-based PFMT. The upper boundary of the 95% CI for the difference in the percentage reduction in urinary incontinence episodes at 1 year was lower than the prespecified margin for noninferiority of 10% (difference, 4%; 95% CI, −10% to 7%; P = .58), confirming noninferiority. Individual PFMT and group-based PFMT had similar effectiveness for all secondary outcomes at 1 year. Adverse events were minor and uncommon. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Results of the GROUP study suggest that group-based PFMT is not inferior to the recommended individual PFMT for the treatment of stress and mixed urinary incontinence in older women. Widespread use in clinical practice may help increase continence-care affordability and treatment availability. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02039830

No abstract

No abstract

Aims:To test the reliability and validity of intravaginal pressure measurements acquired during pelvic floor muscle (PFM) tasks in different body positions using the FemFit®, a new intravaginal pressure device.Methods: Twenty healthy adult women participated in this study. Two assessment sessions were conducted. Intravaginal pressure measurements using the FemFit® were repeated during PFM contraction and straining maneuvers while lying and standing. Maximal intravaginal pressures were collated and compared within and between sessions. They were also correlated to maximal force measurements obtained by dynamometry and vaginal digital palpation. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement and Bland-Altman plots. The validity of the pressure measurements was assessed using Pearson's correlation (dynamometry) and Spearman's rho (palpation).Results: This test-retest study indicate excellent reliability for PFM contraction and straining maneuver both in lying and standing, within and between sessions. For the straining maneuver while standing, increased variability was suggested by a wider limit of agreement on Bland-Altman plots (spanning 31.3 to 43.3mm Hg). A significant moderate to strong correlation was found when comparing measurements of PFM contraction using the FemFit® and the dynamometer or the palpation (Pearson's coefficient = 0.72, P = .006; Spearman's rho = 0.68, P = .005, respectively). Conclusion: Our research findings suggest that intravaginal pressures can be reliably measured during PFM contraction and straining manoeuver while lying and standing, using the FemFit® device, both within and between sessions. A moderate to strong correlation between the FemFit® pressure and the force measurements obtained by dynamometry or palpation reinforce the validity of measurements. K E Y W O R D Sfemale, intra-abdominal pressure, intravaginal pressure, pelvic floor, physiotherapy

No abstract