Comparison of the effects of early pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation on postpartum pelvic floor rehabilitation and sexual function in different delivery methods
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1008-6706.2019.24.004
- VernacularTitle: 早期盆底肌康复治疗对不同分娩方式产妇产后盆底康复、性功能的影响比较
- Author:
Li ZHU
1
;
Lingping CHEN
;
Panxi ZHANG
;
Feng QI
Author Information
1. Department of Gynecology, Taizhou Hospital, Linhai, Zhejiang 317000, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Pelvic floor;
Hospitals, convalescent;
Cesarean section;
Natural childbirth
- From:
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy
2019;26(24):2957-2960
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To observe the effect of early pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation on postpartum pelvic floor rehabilitation and sexual function in different delivery methods.
Methods:Ninety-three parturient women who admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Taizhou Hospital from January 2018 to December 2018 were divided into cesarean section group (53 cases) and vaginal delivery group (40 cases) according to the mode of delivery.Early pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation was performed in both two groups.Maternal pelvic floor rehabilitation was assessed by pelvic floor muscle pressure and muscle fiber contraction, and maternal sexual function was assessed by sexual function status score.
Results:Before treatment, the sustained systolic blood pressure of type Ⅰ muscle fibers[(28.14±3.03)cmH2O vs.(27.66±3.14)cmH2O], the duration of type Ⅰ muscle fibers[(9.54±1.04)s vs.(9.66±1.00)s], the rapid systolic blood pressure of type Ⅱ muscle fibers[(48.14±3.03)cmH2O vs.(47.66±3.14)cmH2O], and the contraction of type Ⅱ muscle fibers[(2.54±1.04) vs.(2.66±1.00)] had no statistically significant differences between the two groups (t=0.401, 0.312, 2.401, 0.324, all P>0.05). After treatment, the sustained systolic blood pressure of type Ⅰ muscle fibers, duration of type Ⅰ muscle fibers, rapid systolic blood pressure of type Ⅱ muscle fibers, and the contraction of type Ⅱ muscle fibers had statistically significant differences between the two groups (t=10.642, 10.214, 10.672, 10.254, all P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in resting pressure and pelvic systolic pressure between the two groups before intervention (all P>0.05). After intervention, both two indicators were elevated, and the differences were statistically significant compared with before treatment (t=12.093, 14.152, all P<0.05). The resting pressure and pelvic systolic pressure in the cesarean section group were higher than those in the vaginal delivery group, the differences were statistically significant (t=11.642, 10.234, all P<0.05). Compared with before intervention, the indicators and total scores of sexual function in the cesarean section group were better than those in the vaginal delivery group, the differences were statistically significant (t=15.401, 17.312, 19.645, 19.401, 17.312, all P<0.05). After intervention, the maternal sexual function indicators and total score in the two groups were increased, and the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (t=0.642, 1.214, 0.468, 0.668, 0.068, all P> 0.05).
Conclusion:Early pelvic floor rehabilitation is beneficial to the recovery of pelvic floor and sexual function.
