Dataset Information

Behavioral therapy with or without biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation for persistent postprostatectomy incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Although behavioral therapy has been shown to improve postoperative recovery of continence, there have been no controlled trials of behavioral therapy for postprostatectomy incontinence persisting more than 1 year.To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral therapy for reducing persistent postprostatectomy incontinence and to determine whether the technologies of biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation enhance the effectiveness of behavioral therapy.A prospective randomized controlled trial involving 208 community-dwelling men aged 51 through 84 years with incontinence persisting 1 to 17 years after radical prostatectomy was conducted at a university and 2 Veterans Affairs continence clinics (2003-2008) and included a 1-year follow-up after active treatment. Twenty-four percent of the men were African American; 75%, white.After stratification by type and frequency of incontinence, participants were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: 8 weeks of behavioral therapy (pelvic floor muscle training and bladder control strategies); behavioral therapy plus in-office, dual-channel electromyograph biofeedback and daily home pelvic floor electrical stimulation at 20 Hz, current up to 100 mA (behavior plus); or delayed treatment, which served as the control group.Percentage reduction in mean number of incontinence episodes after 8 weeks of treatment as documented in 7-day bladder diaries.Mean incontinence episodes decreased from 28 to 13 per week (55% reduction; 95% confidence interval [CI], 44%-66%) after behavioral therapy and from 26 to 12 (51% reduction; 95% CI, 37%-65%) after behavior plus therapy. Both reductions were significantly greater than the reduction from 25 to 21 (24% reduction; 95% CI, 10%-39%) observed among controls (P = .001 for both treatment groups). However, there was no significant difference in incontinence reduction between the treatment groups (P = .69). Improvements were durable to 12 months in the active treatment groups: 50% reduction (95% CI, 39.8%-61.1%; 13.5 episodes per week) in the behavioral group and 59% reduction (95% CI, 45.0%-73.1%; 9.1 episodes per week) in the behavior plus group (P = .32).Among patients with postprostatectomy incontinence for at least 1 year, 8 weeks of behavioral therapy, compared with a delayed-treatment control, resulted in fewer incontinence episodes. The addition of biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation did not result in greater effectiveness.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00212264.

SUBMITTER: Goode PS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5557087 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Behavioral therapy with or without biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation for persistent postprostatectomy incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.

Goode Patricia S PS Burgio Kathryn L KL Johnson Theodore M TM Clay Olivio J OJ Roth David L DL Markland Alayne D AD Burkhardt Jeffrey H JH Issa Muta M MM Lloyd L Keith LK

JAMA 20110101 2

<h4>Context</h4>Although behavioral therapy has been shown to improve postoperative recovery of continence, there have been no controlled trials of behavioral therapy for postprostatectomy incontinence persisting more than 1 year.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral therapy for reducing persistent postprostatectomy incontinence and to determine whether the technologies of biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation enhance the effectiveness of behavioral therapy. ...[more]

PMID: 21224456

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus electromyographic biofeedback or PFMT alone for stress or mixed urinary incontinence in women.DesignParallel group randomised controlled trial.Setting23 community and secondary care centres providing continence care in Scotland and England.Participants600 women aged 18 and older, newly presenting with stress or mixed urinary incontinence between February 2014 and July 2016: 300 were randomised to PFMT plus electromyographic biofeedback and 300 to PFMT alone.InterventionsParticipants in both groups were offered six appointments with a continence therapist over 16 weeks. Participants in the biofeedback PFMT group received supervised PFMT and a home PFMT programme, incorporating electromyographic biofeedback during clinic appointments and at home. The PFMT group received supervised PFMT and a home PFMT programme. PFMT programmes were progressed over the appointments.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported severity of urinary incontinence (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-urinary incontinence short form (ICIQ-UI SF), range 0 to 21, higher scores indicating greater severity) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were cure or improvement, other pelvic floor symptoms, condition specific quality of life, women's perception of improvement, pelvic floor muscle function, uptake of other urinary incontinence treatment, PFMT self-efficacy, adherence, intervention costs, and quality adjusted life years.ResultsMean ICIQ-UI SF scores at 24 months were 8.2 (SD 5.1, n=225) in the biofeedback PFMT group and 8.5 (SD 4.9, n=235) in the PFMT group (mean difference -0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.92 to 0.75, P=0.84). Biofeedback PFMT had similar costs (mean difference £121 ($154; €133), -£409 to £651, P=0.64) and quality adjusted life years (-0.04, -0.12 to 0.04, P=0.28) to PFMT. 48 participants reported an adverse event: for 23 this was related or possibly related to the interventions.ConclusionsAt 24 months no evidence was found of any important difference in severity of urinary incontinence between PFMT plus electromyographic biofeedback and PFMT alone groups. Routine use of electromyographic biofeedback with PFMT should not be recommended. Other ways of maximising the effects of PFMT should be investigated.Trial registrationISRCTN57756448.

Project description:PurposeThis systematic review determines the best known form of biofeedback (BF) and/or electrical stimulation (ES) for the treatment of fecal incontinence in adults and rates the quality of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Attention is given to type, strength, and application mode of the current for ES and to safety.MethodsMethods followed the Cochrane Handbook. Randomized controlled trials were included. Studies were searched in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (registration number (PROSPERO): CRD42011001334).ResultsBF and/or ES were studied in 13 randomized parallel-group trials. In 12 trials, at least one therapy group received BF alone and/or in combination with ES, while ES alone was evaluated in seven trials. Three (four) trials were rated as of high (moderate) quality. Average current strength was reported in three of seven studies investigating ES; only two studies reached the therapeutic window. No trial showed superiority of control, or of BF alone or of ES alone when compared with BF + ES. Superiority of BF + ES over any monotherapy was demonstrated in several trials. Amplitude-modulated medium-frequency (AM-MF) stimulation, also termed pre-modulated interferential stimulation, combined with BF was superior to both low-frequency ES and BF alone, and 50 % of the patients were continent after 6 months of treatment. Effects increased with treatment duration. Safety reporting was bad, and there are safety issues with some forms of low-frequency ES.ConclusionsThere is sufficient evidence for the efficacy of BF plus ES combined in treating fecal incontinence. AM-MF plus BF seems to be the most effective and safe treatment.Key messages• The higher the quality of the randomized trial the more likely was a significant difference between treatment groups. • Two times more patients became continent when biofeedback was used instead of a control, such as pelvic floor exercises. • Two times more patients became continent when biofeedback plus electrical stimulation was used instead of biofeedback only. • Low-frequency electrical stimulation can have adverse device effects, and this is in contrast to amplitude-modulated medium-frequency electrical stimulation. • There is high quality evidence that amplitude-modulated medium-frequency electrical stimulation plus electromyography biofeedback is the best second-line treatment for fecal incontinence.

Project description:The aim of this study was to compare the effect of pelvic floor muscle training with surface electromyographic (sEMG) biofeedback (BF group) and Pilates exercises (P group) on the bioelectrical activity of pelvic floor muscles in women with stress urinary incontinence. The other aim aim was to compare changes in voiding diaries and scores on quality of life questionnaire against baseline values and between the groups. Women in the BF group (n = 18) participated in pelvic floor muscle training with sEMG biofeedback; the P group (n = 13) participated in basic level Pilates workouts. Both protocols were continued for eight weeks. Voiding diary, quality of life and electromyographic characteristics of the pelvic floor muscles were assessed at the three-time points: at baseline, after eight weeks' training, and at month six post-training. The sEMG activity of the pelvic floor muscles was tested during five trials in two positions. There was no marked improvement in bioelectrical activity of the pelvic floor muscles during contraction following training with sEMG biofeedback or Pilates exercises. Following eight weeks of sEMG biofeedback training, a decrease was noted in resting bioelectrical activity of pelvic floor muscles and during relaxation after sustained contraction but only in supine-lying. No such effect was observed in the Pilates group. In the BF group, the number of incontinence episodes after end of treatment (timpepoints: 1vs. 2) and at six month follow-up (timpepoints: 1vs. 3) decreased by 68.5% and 89.3%, respectively. The respective values in the P group were 78.6%, and 86.4%. The intergroup differences did not reach the level of statistical significance. As regards the quality of life, the questionnaire demonstrated that Pilates exercises had significantly better effects compared to biofeedback training both at the end of the eight-week exercise program and (p = 0.003) and at six month follow-up (p = 0.0009). The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ- SF) showed comparable efficacy of Pilates exercises and training with sEMG biofeedback. Intragroup improvements in micturition frequency, incontinence (leakage) episodes, and nocturia frequency were comparable. Alleviation of urinary incontinence symptoms was comparable in both groups, whereas the improvement in the quality of life was more notable in the Pilates group. The obtained results failed to demonstrate the superiority of any of the two methods regarding the bioelectrical activity of pelvic floor muscles in patients with stress urinary incontinence.

Project description:BackgroundIntravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) has been explored as a potential treatment for pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), although its efficacy remains a subject of debate. We aim to conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of relevant trials.MethodsThis meta-analysis was performed under the PRISMA 2020 guideline. We meticulously searched for randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies in various databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov, spanning from inception to March 6, 2023. All studies included one treatment group of intravaginal electrical stimulation and the diseases spectrum of the studies involved different kinds of PFDs, including urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, etc. Risk of bias charts were used to assess the risk of bias in the studies and forest plots were used the demonstrate the overall effects.ResultsOur analysis encompassed a total of 13 RCT studies. In most of the assessed PFD cure outcomes, the results demonstrated positive effects of IVES therapy, as indicated by the following findings: daily voiding frequency (MD = -1.57, 95% CI = -3.08 to -0.06, I 2 = 68%,), nocturia (MD = -1.07, 95% CI = -2.01 to -0.13, I 2 = 71%), Pad test, and Urinary incontinence. Nevertheless, the data concerning the impact of IVES therapy on the quality of life of individuals with PFDs did not confirm these positive results.DiscussionIn light of the insufficiency in both the quality and quantity of the included studies, it is premature to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the efficacy of IVES therapy for treating PFDs. Nonetheless, our study does provide several pieces of evidence in support of the potential therapeutic effects of electrical stimulation therapy in this context. We recommend that further research in this area be conducted to provide more conclusive insights into the efficacy of IVES therapy for PFDs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42023442171.

Dataset Information

Behavioral therapy with or without biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation for persistent postprostatectomy incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Behavioral therapy with or without biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation for persistent postprostatectomy incontinence: a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets