家庭生物反馈与物理治疗压力性尿失禁:一项随机试验。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI:10.1097/SPV.0000000000000993
Kara Lauren Barnes, Sara Cichowski, Yuko M Komesu, Peter C Jeppson, Brenna McGuire, Cara S Ninivaggio, Gena C Dunivan
{"title":"家庭生物反馈与物理治疗压力性尿失禁:一项随机试验。","authors":"Kara Lauren Barnes,&nbsp;Sara Cichowski,&nbsp;Yuko M Komesu,&nbsp;Peter C Jeppson,&nbsp;Brenna McGuire,&nbsp;Cara S Ninivaggio,&nbsp;Gena C Dunivan","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000000993","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to assess whether home biofeedback is noninferior to supervised pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a randomized controlled noninferiority trial to compare a home biofeedback device with PFPT. Women older than 18 years with SUI and no history of a prior incontinence surgery or PFPT were eligible. Forty-two participants were required to determine noninferiority for the primary outcome, improvement in quality of life as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form. The noninferiority margin was 4 points. Secondary outcomes included sexual function, overactive bladder symptoms, and patient impression of improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From June 2018 to October 2019, 54 women with SUI were recruited (27 biofeedback, 27 PFPT) and 43 (21 biofeedback, 22 PFPT) completed follow-up. The groups had comparable baseline characteristics. For the primary outcome of change in mean International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form scores (where lower scores indicate less incontinence), home biofeedback was found to be noninferior to PFPT with a mean decrease from baseline of -3.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.21 to -5.70) in the home biofeedback group versus -4.73 (95% CI = -3.21 to -6.25) and -3.95 (95% CI = -2.21 to -5.70) in the PFPT group (P = 0.009). The PFPT group showed more improvement in overactive bladder symptoms, but not in incontinence severity without difference in sexual function.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Home biofeedback was noninferior to PFPT for the primary treatment of SUI in women at 3 months. These results support the use of personal biofeedback devices for the treatment of SUI.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03443687.</p>","PeriodicalId":48831,"journal":{"name":"Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery","volume":"27 10","pages":"587-594"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Home Biofeedback Versus Physical Therapy for Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Kara Lauren Barnes,&nbsp;Sara Cichowski,&nbsp;Yuko M Komesu,&nbsp;Peter C Jeppson,&nbsp;Brenna McGuire,&nbsp;Cara S Ninivaggio,&nbsp;Gena C Dunivan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SPV.0000000000000993\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to assess whether home biofeedback is noninferior to supervised pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a randomized controlled noninferiority trial to compare a home biofeedback device with PFPT. Women older than 18 years with SUI and no history of a prior incontinence surgery or PFPT were eligible. Forty-two participants were required to determine noninferiority for the primary outcome, improvement in quality of life as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form. The noninferiority margin was 4 points. Secondary outcomes included sexual function, overactive bladder symptoms, and patient impression of improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From June 2018 to October 2019, 54 women with SUI were recruited (27 biofeedback, 27 PFPT) and 43 (21 biofeedback, 22 PFPT) completed follow-up. The groups had comparable baseline characteristics. For the primary outcome of change in mean International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form scores (where lower scores indicate less incontinence), home biofeedback was found to be noninferior to PFPT with a mean decrease from baseline of -3.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.21 to -5.70) in the home biofeedback group versus -4.73 (95% CI = -3.21 to -6.25) and -3.95 (95% CI = -2.21 to -5.70) in the PFPT group (P = 0.009). The PFPT group showed more improvement in overactive bladder symptoms, but not in incontinence severity without difference in sexual function.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Home biofeedback was noninferior to PFPT for the primary treatment of SUI in women at 3 months. These results support the use of personal biofeedback devices for the treatment of SUI.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03443687.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"volume\":\"27 10\",\"pages\":\"587-594\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000993\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000993","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估家庭生物反馈是否优于监督盆底物理疗法(PFPT)治疗女性压力性尿失禁(SUI)。方法:采用随机对照非劣效性试验比较家庭生物反馈装置与PFPT。年龄大于18岁的SUI患者,既往无失禁手术或PFPT史。需要42名参与者来确定主要结局的非劣效性,即通过国际失禁问卷简短形式咨询来衡量生活质量的改善。非劣效性差为4分。次要结局包括性功能、膀胱过度活动症状和患者对改善的印象。结果:2018年6月至2019年10月,共招募54名SUI女性(27名生物反馈,27名PFPT), 43名(21名生物反馈,22名PFPT)完成随访。两组具有可比的基线特征。对于国际失禁咨询问卷-简短形式平均得分变化的主要结局(得分越低表明失禁越少),发现家庭生物反馈不低于PFPT,家庭生物反馈组平均从基线下降-3.95(95%置信区间[CI] = -2.21至-5.70),而PFPT组平均从基线下降-4.73 (95% CI = -3.21至-6.25)和-3.95 (95% CI = -2.21至-5.70)(P = 0.009)。PFPT组在膀胱过度活动症状上有明显改善,但在尿失禁严重程度上无明显改善,在性功能上无明显差异。结论:家庭生物反馈在3个月女性SUI的主要治疗中不逊色于PFPT。这些结果支持使用个人生物反馈装置治疗SUI。临床试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03443687。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Home Biofeedback Versus Physical Therapy for Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Trial.

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess whether home biofeedback is noninferior to supervised pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women.

Methods: The study used a randomized controlled noninferiority trial to compare a home biofeedback device with PFPT. Women older than 18 years with SUI and no history of a prior incontinence surgery or PFPT were eligible. Forty-two participants were required to determine noninferiority for the primary outcome, improvement in quality of life as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form. The noninferiority margin was 4 points. Secondary outcomes included sexual function, overactive bladder symptoms, and patient impression of improvement.

Results: From June 2018 to October 2019, 54 women with SUI were recruited (27 biofeedback, 27 PFPT) and 43 (21 biofeedback, 22 PFPT) completed follow-up. The groups had comparable baseline characteristics. For the primary outcome of change in mean International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form scores (where lower scores indicate less incontinence), home biofeedback was found to be noninferior to PFPT with a mean decrease from baseline of -3.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.21 to -5.70) in the home biofeedback group versus -4.73 (95% CI = -3.21 to -6.25) and -3.95 (95% CI = -2.21 to -5.70) in the PFPT group (P = 0.009). The PFPT group showed more improvement in overactive bladder symptoms, but not in incontinence severity without difference in sexual function.

Conclusions: Home biofeedback was noninferior to PFPT for the primary treatment of SUI in women at 3 months. These results support the use of personal biofeedback devices for the treatment of SUI.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03443687.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
228
期刊介绍: Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, official journal of the American Urogynecologic Society, is a peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to specialists, physicians and allied health professionals concerned with prevention, diagnosis and treatment of female pelvic floor disorders. The journal publishes original clinical research, basic science research, education, scientific advances, case reports, scientific reviews, editorials and letters to the editor.
期刊最新文献
AUGS-PERFORM: A New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Assess Quality of Prolapse Care. Factors Associated With a Positive Urine Culture in Women Seeking Urogynecologic Care for Urinary Tract Infection Symptoms. Complications Reported to the Food and Drug Administration: A Cross-sectional Comparison of Urogynecologic Meshes. The Role of Pessaries in the Treatment of Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Impact of Methenamine Hippurate Treatment on Urothelial Integrity and Bladder Inflammation in Aged Female Mice and Women With Urinary Tract Infections.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1