Manometry and dynamometry are more reliable tools than vaginal palpation for the assessment of PFM strength in women with pelvic floor disorders, especially when different raters are involved. The different PFM strength measures used clinically are moderately correlated; whereas, PFM activation recorded using transperineal sEMG is only weakly correlated with PFM strength. Results from perineal sEMG should not be interpreted in the context of reporting PFM strength.

Defined patterns of abdominal muscle activity were found in response to voluntary PFM contractions in healthy continent women.

The reliability of the dynamometer is adequate for both clinical and research applications. Relative forces were more reliable than absolute forces. Dimensions and rate of tissue elongation should be controlled and reported with all pelvic floor muscle assessments as these parameters impact outcomes.

No abstract

All commercially available intravaginal probes had deficiencies in their design such as problems with probe geometry, electrode size, location, and/or configuration. Improved intravaginal EMG probes should be developed for use in research and clinical practice.