2015Chin J Biomed EngRequires access

Outcomes of pelvic floor muscle exercise combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction

Beibei Lin, Yue'e Zu, Xing Fan, Yuying Song, Yang Xu

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To investigate the outcomes of conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Methods A total of 198 women diagnosed with pelvic floor muscle dysfunction after natural labor at our hospital between January 2014 and June 2014 were included in this study. According to personal intention, the patients were divided into the treatment group (n=99) and the control group (n=99). On day 42 postpartum, the control group received conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation (pelvic floor muscle exercise) , whereas the treatment group received electrical stimulation and biofeedback in addition to the conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation. Before treatment and at 3 months postpartum, the two groups of patients were measured for muscle strength of the pelvic floor. At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the vaginal resting pressure, vaginal squeezing pressure and duration of vaginal contractions of the two groups were examined. The incidences of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapsed and sex satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results Before treatment, the pelvic floor muscle strength did not differ significantly between the two groups (P>0.05). At 3 months postpartum, patients in the treatment group had higher pelvic floor muscle strength than the controls (P<0.05). At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the treatment group showed significantly higher vaginal resting pressure, vagina squeezing pressure, and longer duration of vaginal contractions, less urinary incontinence and better sex satisfaction (all P<0.05) , compared with the control group. At 6 months postpartum, the rate of pelvic organ prolapsed was 3.0% (3/99) in the treatment group vs 10.1% (10/99) in the control group, with statistically significant difference between two groups (χ2= 2.234, P<0.05). Conclusion Pelvic floor muscle exercise combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback may yield better outcomes for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Key words: Biofeedback; Electrical stimulation; Pelvic floor dysfunction; Treatment outcomes

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To investigate the outcomes of conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Methods A total of 198 women diagnosed with pelvic floor muscle dysfunction after natural labor at our hospital between January 2014 and June 2014 were included in this study. According to personal intention, the patients were divided into the treatment group (n=99) and the control group (n=99). On day 42 postpartum, the control group received conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation (pelvic floor muscle exercise) , whereas the treatment group received electrical stimulation and biofeedback in addition to the conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation. Before treatment and at 3 months postpartum, the two groups of patients were measured for muscle strength of the pelvic floor. At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the vaginal resting pressure, vaginal squeezing pressure and duration of vaginal contractions of the two groups were examined. The incidences of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapsed and sex satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results Before treatment, the pelvic floor muscle strength did not differ significantly between the two groups (P>0.05). At 3 months postpartum, patients in the treatment group had higher pelvic floor muscle strength than the controls (P<0.05). At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the treatment group showed significantly higher vaginal resting pressure, vagina squeezing pressure, and longer duration of vaginal contractions, less urinary incontinence and better sex satisfaction (all P<0.05) , compared with the control group. At 6 months postpartum, the rate of pelvic organ prolapsed was 3.0% (3/99) in the treatment group vs 10.1% (10/99) in the control group, with statistically significant difference between two groups (χ2= 2.234, P<0.05). Conclusion Pelvic floor muscle exercise combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback may yield better outcomes for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Key words: Biofeedback; Electrical stimulation; Pelvic floor dysfunction; Treatment outcomes

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To investigate the outcomes of conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Methods A total of 198 women diagnosed with pelvic floor muscle dysfunction after natural labor at our hospital between January 2014 and June 2014 were included in this study. According to personal intention, the patients were divided into the treatment group (n=99) and the control group (n=99). On day 42 postpartum, the control group received conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation (pelvic floor muscle exercise) , whereas the treatment group received electrical stimulation and biofeedback in addition to the conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation. Before treatment and at 3 months postpartum, the two groups of patients were measured for muscle strength of the pelvic floor. At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the vaginal resting pressure, vaginal squeezing pressure and duration of vaginal contractions of the two groups were examined. The incidences of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapsed and sex satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results Before treatment, the pelvic floor muscle strength did not differ significantly between the two groups (P>0.05). At 3 months postpartum, patients in the treatment group had higher pelvic floor muscle strength than the controls (P<0.05). At 3 and 6 months postpartum, the treatment group showed significantly higher vaginal resting pressure, vagina squeezing pressure, and longer duration of vaginal contractions, less urinary incontinence and better sex satisfaction (all P<0.05) , compared with the control group. At 6 months postpartum, the rate of pelvic organ prolapsed was 3.0% (3/99) in the treatment group vs 10.1% (10/99) in the control group, with statistically significant difference between two groups (χ2= 2.234, P<0.05). Conclusion Pelvic floor muscle exercise combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback may yield better outcomes for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Key words: Biofeedback; Electrical stimulation; Pelvic floor dysfunction; Treatment outcomes

Key concepts: Pelvic Floor Muscle, Pelvic floor, Medicine, Biofeedback, Pelvic floor dysfunction, Urinary incontinence, Postpartum period, Vagina

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Outcomes of pelvic floor muscle exercise combined with electrical stimulation and biofeedback for treatment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle dysfunction — Research Paper | ScholarLens