A. Madani, Fatemeh Chafjiri, S. Esmaeili, Z. Madani, E. Leili
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF) stimulation in the treatment of urinary symptoms in women with urinary incontinence","authors":"A. Madani, Fatemeh Chafjiri, S. Esmaeili, Z. Madani, E. Leili","doi":"10.4103/UROS.UROS_123_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: There are different approaches to the treatment of urinary incontinence (UI), including pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and surgical methods. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation is a nontraditional and noninvasive type of treatment, which is gaining increasing popularity in healthcare departments for UI treatment. Materials and Methods: In this quasi-experimental study, women (age ≥21 years) with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were assigned to three groups regarding the UI type (urgency, stress, and mixed UI). The Bristol Female LUTS (BFLUTS) questionnaire was used to evaluate the UI severity. The patients were treated with PEMF stimulation twice per week up to 6 weeks. The results were evaluated at three and 6 months posttreatment. Results: Ninety women completed 6 months of follow-up in this study. The mean age of the participants was 58.5 ± 13.9 years. Of 90 patients, 61 (67.8%) had mixed UI, 22 (24.4%) had urge UI, and 7 (7.8%) had stress UI. There were significant differences between the groups regarding the frequency of leakage from baseline to 3 and 6 months after treatment; the reduction of leakage severity was only nonsignificant in the stress UI group (P = 0.368). Based on the results, the number of used pads reduced from 4.18 ± 3.00 to 1.08 ± 2.03 (P < 0.001); this reduction was also significant in each of the groups. The mean BFLUTS score reduced from 7.42 ± 2.53 at baseline to 5.56 ± 2.37 and 3.00 ± 2.33 at 3 and 6 months after treatment, respectively (P < 0.001). No significant complications were detected in the groups. Conclusion: The PEMF stimulation is a safe and effective approach for reducing the symptoms of patients with UI. The best response to treatment was reported at 6 months posttreatment. Therefore, it is recommended to use PMEF stimulation as a noninvasive treatment along with routine therapies.","PeriodicalId":23449,"journal":{"name":"Urological Science","volume":"33 1","pages":"170 - 175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urological Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/UROS.UROS_123_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose: There are different approaches to the treatment of urinary incontinence (UI), including pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and surgical methods. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation is a nontraditional and noninvasive type of treatment, which is gaining increasing popularity in healthcare departments for UI treatment. Materials and Methods: In this quasi-experimental study, women (age ≥21 years) with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were assigned to three groups regarding the UI type (urgency, stress, and mixed UI). The Bristol Female LUTS (BFLUTS) questionnaire was used to evaluate the UI severity. The patients were treated with PEMF stimulation twice per week up to 6 weeks. The results were evaluated at three and 6 months posttreatment. Results: Ninety women completed 6 months of follow-up in this study. The mean age of the participants was 58.5 ± 13.9 years. Of 90 patients, 61 (67.8%) had mixed UI, 22 (24.4%) had urge UI, and 7 (7.8%) had stress UI. There were significant differences between the groups regarding the frequency of leakage from baseline to 3 and 6 months after treatment; the reduction of leakage severity was only nonsignificant in the stress UI group (P = 0.368). Based on the results, the number of used pads reduced from 4.18 ± 3.00 to 1.08 ± 2.03 (P < 0.001); this reduction was also significant in each of the groups. The mean BFLUTS score reduced from 7.42 ± 2.53 at baseline to 5.56 ± 2.37 and 3.00 ± 2.33 at 3 and 6 months after treatment, respectively (P < 0.001). No significant complications were detected in the groups. Conclusion: The PEMF stimulation is a safe and effective approach for reducing the symptoms of patients with UI. The best response to treatment was reported at 6 months posttreatment. Therefore, it is recommended to use PMEF stimulation as a noninvasive treatment along with routine therapies.