Dataset Information

Completeness of exercise reporting among randomized controlled trials on pelvic floor muscle training for women with pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

This systematic review aimed to assess the completeness of exercise reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) for women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods

MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, CINHAL, Embase, SCOPUS, and PEDro databases were searched up to October 2020. Full-text RCTs comparing PFMT to any type of intervention among women with any type and stage of POP were eligible for inclusion. Completeness of intervention was evaluated with t20he template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) and the consensus on exercise reporting template (CERT). Inter-rater agreement for each item of the tools was calculated.

Results

Twenty-six RCTs were included. None of the studies completely reported all intervention descriptors. On average 57.1% (6.8 ± 2.4; out of 12) of the overall TIDieR items and 35.3% (6.7 ± 2.9; out of 19) of the CERT were well described. In particular, 7 and 5 items were completely reported more than 50% of the time for the TIDieR and CERT, respectively. Frequent shortcomings were the undetailed reporting of information regarding tailoring and modifications of exercises and their adherence. Detailed descriptions of exercise repetitions to enable replication were missing in 53.8%. According to the CERT, only 11.5% of the RCTs sufficiently described the main providers' characteristics.

Conclusion

The completeness of PFMT reporting for women with POP is still below desirable standards and it is insufficient to ensure transferability into practice. The present results may add relevant knowledge and contribute to improving adequate reporting of exercise.

SUBMITTER: Giagio S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8362041 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT) has been shown to be effective for pelvic organ prolapse in women, but its implementation in routine practice is challenging due to lack of adequate specialist staff. It is important to know if PFMT can be delivered by different staff skill mixes, what barriers and facilitators operate in different contexts, what strategies enable successful implementation and what are the underlying mechanisms of their action. PROPEL intervention was designed to maximise the delivery of effective PFMT in the UK NHS using different staff skill mixes. We conducted a realist evaluation (RE) of this implementation to understand what works, for whom, in what circumstances and why. Methods Informed by the Realist and RE-AIM frameworks, the study used a longitudinal, qualitative, multiple case study design. The study took place in five, purposively selected, diverse NHS sites across the UK and proceeded in three phases to identify, test and refine a theory of change. Data collection took place at 4 time points over an 18?month implementation period using focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a range of stakeholders including service leads/managers, senior practitioners, newly trained staff and women receiving care in the new service models. Data were analysed using thematic framework approach adapted to identify Context, Mechanism and Outcome (CMO) configurations of the RE. Results A heightened awareness of the service need among staff and management was a mechanism for change, particularly in areas where there was a shortage of skilled staff. In contrast, the most established specialist physiotherapist-delivered PFMT service activated feelings of role protection and compromised quality, which restricted the reach of PFMT through alternative models. Staff with some level of prior knowledge in women’s health and adequate organisational support were more comfortable and confident in new role. Implementation was seamless when PFMT delivery was incorporated in newly trained staff’s role and core work. Conclusion Roll-out of PFMT delivery through different staff skill mixes is possible when it is undertaken by clinicians with an interest in women’s health, and carefully implemented ensuring adequate levels of training and ongoing support from specialists, multi-disciplinary teams and management.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training and watchful waiting on pelvic floor symptoms in a primary care population of women aged 55 years and over with symptomatic mild pelvic organ prolapse.DesignRandomised controlled trial.SettingDutch primary care.ParticipantsWomen aged 55 years or over with symptomatic mild prolapse (leading edge above the hymen) were identified by screening. Exclusion criteria were current prolapse treatment or treatment in the previous year, malignancy of pelvic organs, current treatment for another gynaecological disorder, severe/terminal illness, impaired mobility, cognitive impairment, and insufficient command of the Dutch language.InterventionsPelvic floor muscle training versus watchful waiting.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was change in bladder, bowel, and pelvic floor symptoms measured with the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20), three months after the start of treatment. Secondary outcomes were changes in condition specific and general quality of life, sexual function, degree of prolapse, pelvic floor muscle function, and patients' perceived change in symptoms.ResultsOf the 287 women who were randomised to pelvic floor muscle training (n=145) or watchful waiting (n=142), 250 (87%) completed follow-up. Participants in the intervention group improved by (on average) 9.1 (95% confidence interval 2.8 to 15.4) points more on the PFDI-20 than did participants in the watchful waiting group (P=0.005). Of women in the pelvic floor muscle training group, 57% (82/145) reported an improvement in overall symptoms from the start of the study compared with 13% (18/142) in the watchful waiting group (P<0.001). Other secondary outcomes showed no significant difference between the groups.ConclusionsAlthough pelvic floor muscle training led to a significantly greater improvement in PFDI-20 score, the difference between the groups was below the presumed level of clinical relevance (15 points). Nevertheless, 57% of the participants in the intervention group reported an improvement of overall symptoms. More studies are needed to identify factors related to success of pelvic floor muscle training and to investigate long term effects.Trial registration Dutch Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl) identifier: NTR2047.