ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem
Evaluation of perineal muscle strength in the first trimester of pregnancy.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Semi-supervised Telerehabilitation Exercise Program for Pelvic Floor Function in Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.International journal of telerehabilitation · 2026Article
- What is known about changes in pelvic floor muscle strength and tone in women during the childbirth pathway? A scoping review.European journal of midwifery · 2024Article
- Physiotherapy according to the BeBo Concept as prophylaxis and treatment of urinary incontinence in women after natural childbirth.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Pelvic floor muscle strength in primiparous women according to the delivery type: cross-sectional study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto analyze the Pelvic Floor Muscle Strength (PFMS) of pregnant women with one or more vaginal or cesarean deliveries; to compare the PFMS of these with pregnant women with the PFMS of primiparous women.
methodscross-sectional study with women up to 12 weeks pregnant, performed in Itapecerica da Serra, São Paulo state, from December 2012 to May 2013. The sample consisted of 110 pregnant women with one or more vaginal deliveries or cesarean sections and 110 primigravidae. The PFMS was evaluated by perineometry (Peritron(tm)) and vaginal digital palpation (modified Oxford scale).
resultsthe average PFMS in pregnant women with a history of vaginal delivery or cesarean section was 33.4 (SD=21.2) cmH2O. From the Oxford scale, 75.4% of the pregnant women with previous vaginal or cesarean deliveries presented grade ≤ 2, and 5.5% grade ≥ 4; among the primiparae, 39.9% presented grade ≤ 2, and 50.9% grade ≥ 4, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). From the perineometry, there was no statistically significant difference between the PFMS and age, type of delivery, parity, body mass index, and genitourinary tract symptoms, however, there was a statistically significant difference between the pregnant women with and without a history of episiotomy (p=0.04). In the palpation, none of the variables showed a statistically significant difference.
conclusionpregnancy and childbirth can reduce the PFMS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.