FES-biofeedback versus intensive pelvic floor muscle exercise for the prevention and treatment of genuine stress incontinence.
10.3346/jkms.2000.15.3.303
- Author:
Myoung Sook SUNG
1
;
Jae Yup HONG
;
Young Hee CHOI
;
Sung Hee BAIK
;
Hana YOON
Author Information
1. Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Clinical Trial ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Keywords:
Urinary Incontinence, Stress;
Pelvic Floor;
Exercise Therapy;
Electrical Stimulation Therapy;
Biofeedback (Psychology)
- MeSH:
Activities of Daily Living;
Biofeedback (Psychology)*;
Exercise Therapy*/methods;
Female;
Human;
Muscle Contraction;
Muscles;
Pelvic Floor;
Treatment Outcome;
Urinary Incontinence, Stress/therapy*;
Urinary Incontinence, Stress/psychology;
Urinary Incontinence, Stress/prevention & control;
Urinary Incontinence, Stress/physiopathology
- From:Journal of Korean Medical Science
2000;15(3):303-308
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
We undertook this work to compare the treatment efficacies and the changes of quality of life after pelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercise and the functional electrical stimulation (FES)-biofeedback treatment, both of which are being widely used as conservative treatment methods for female urinary incontinence. We randomly selected 60 female incontinence patients who visited our department and divided them evenly into two groups. They were treated for a period of 6 weeks. The subjective changes in the severity of incontinence and discomfort in daily and social life were measured using a translated version of the questionnaire by Jackson. Objective changes of pelvic muscle contraction force were measured using a perineometer. Pre- and post-treatment maximal pelvic floor muscle contractile (PMC) pressure and changes in the severity of urinary incontinence and discomfort of the two groups showed statistically significant differences (p>0.001). In particular the FES-biofeedback group showed significantly increased maximal PMC pressure and a decreased severity of urinary incontinence and discomfort compared to the intensive PFM exercise group (p>0.001). In conclusion, FES-biofeedback proved more effective than simple PFM exercise.
