Single blind, randomised controlled trial of pelvic floor exercises, electrical stimulation, vaginal cones, and no treatment in management of genuine stress incontinence in women |
| |
| Authors: | Bø K Talseth T Holme I |
| |
| Institution: | Norwegian Centre for Physiotherapy Research and Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education, PO Box 4014, Ulleval Stadion, 0806 Oslo, Norway. karib@brage.idrettshs.no |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectiveTo compare the effect of pelvic floor exercises, electrical stimulation, vaginal cones, and no treatment for genuine stress incontinence.DesignStratified, single blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingMulticentre.Participants107 women with clinically and urodynamically proved genuine stress incontinence. Mean (range) age was 49.5 (24-70) years, and mean (range) duration of symptoms 10.8 (1-45) years.InterventionsPelvic floor exercise (n=25) comprised 8-12 contractions 3 times a day and exercise in groups with skilled physical therapists once a week. The electrical stimulation group (n=25) used vaginal intermittent stimulation with the MS 106 Twin at 50?Hz 30 minutes a day. The vaginal cones group (n=27) used cones for 20 minutes a day. The untreated control group (n=30) was offered the use of a continence guard. Muscle strength was measured by vaginal squeeze pressure once a month.ResultsImprovement in muscle strength was significantly greater (P=0.03) after pelvic floor exercises (11.0?cm H2O (95% confidence interval 7.7 to 14.3) before v 19.2?cm H2O (15.3 to 23.1) after) than either electrical stimulation (14.8?cm H2O (10.9 to 18.7) v 18.6 cm H2O (13.3 to 23.9)) or vaginal cones (11.8?cm H2O (8.5 to 15.1) v 15.4?cm H2O (11.1 to 19.7)). Reduction in leakage on pad test was greater in the exercise group (?30.2?g; ?43.3 to 16.9) than in the electrical stimulation group (?7.4?g; ?20.9 to 6.1) and the vaginal cones group (?14.7?g; ?27.6 to ?1.8). On completion of the trial one participant in the control group, 14 in the pelvic floor exercise group, three in the electrical stimulation group, and two in the vaginal cones group no longer considered themselves as having a problem.ConclusionTraining of the pelvic floor muscles is superior to electrical stimulation and vaginal cones in the treatment of genuine stress incontinence. Key messages- Training to increase the strength of pelvic floor muscles was superior to electrical stimulation and vaginal cones in treatment of genuine stress incontinence
- Adverse effects were reported with use of electrical stimulation and vaginal cones but not with exercises
- Patients’ tolerance for electrical stimulation and vaginal cones was low
- Pelvic floor exercise should be first choice of treatment for genuine stress incontinence
|
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录！ |
|
