Pelvic floor electrical stimulation in the treatment of genuine stress incontinence: A multicenter, placebo-controlled trial

Comparison between two different neuromuscular electrical stimulation protocols for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial

“…In a study by Sand et al 9 the results of the VAS were significantly greater in volunteers who used an active device than from those who received a placebo (SHAM group). Laycock and Jerwood 16 demonstrated a significant improvement in VAS after the application of NMES with an interferential current and no effect on the NMES group using placebo.…”

“…Sand et al 9 found a significant increase in perineal pressure among women who used active NMES compared to NMES placebo current. However, Amaro, Gameiro and Padovani 5 found no statistical difference in perineal pressure among groups after one month of treatment, using a current of 4 Hz and pulse width of 0.1 μs.…”

“…Sand et al 9 in a clinical double-blind study treated 52 women with SUI during 15 weeks divided into two groups: one using an equipment of active NMES at frequencies of 12.5 Hz and 50 Hz simultaneously and one of NMES placebo (SHAM). The reduction in urine loss during on the modified 20 minutes pad test in women with active devices was better than those from the SHAM group.…”

“…Although used successfully for over 25 years in clinical practice, there has been no consensus regarding the most effective treatment parameters and protocols of electrical stimulation. Previous studies evaluating the effectiveness of NMES reported varying protocols with regards to the location of the electrode (anal, vaginal or superficial), current parameters, time and duration of treatment 8,9 . The currents of low frequency (LF -50 Hz) and low average frequency modulated (FM -2000 Hz, modulated at 50 Hz) were predominantly used for the treatment of SUI in previous studies 7,[9][10][11][12][13] .…”

“…Previous studies evaluating the effectiveness of NMES reported varying protocols with regards to the location of the electrode (anal, vaginal or superficial), current parameters, time and duration of treatment 8,9 . The currents of low frequency (LF -50 Hz) and low average frequency modulated (FM -2000 Hz, modulated at 50 Hz) were predominantly used for the treatment of SUI in previous studies 7,[9][10][11][12][13] . Medium frequency currents spread rapidly through the tissues arriving at the motor threshold easier and more comfortably than low frequency currents due to the lower impedance offered to theshort electrical pulses.…”