ReviewEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2019
Effect of intravaginal vibratory versus electric stimulation on the pelvic floor muscles: A randomized clinical trial.
Review in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravaginal electrical stimulation for the treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Electrical stimulation plus biofeedback improves urination function, pelvic floor function, and distress after reconstructive surgery: a randomized controlled trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Trial
- Effect of intra-vaginal electric stimulation on bladder compliance in stress urinary incontinence patients: the involvement of autonomic tone.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Can the inability to contract the pelvic floor muscles influence the severity of urinary incontinence symptoms in females?International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Urinary Incontinence in Women: Modern Methods of Physiotherapy as a Support for Surgical Treatment or Independent Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccording to the International Urogynecological Association and International Continence Society people with normal pelvic floor muscle function should have the ability to voluntarily and involuntarily contract and relax these muscles. However, many women are unaware of their pelvic floor, and it is estimated that about 30-50% do not know how to actively contract these muscles. Within this context, therapeutic strategies to improve pelvic floor muscle strength and function are particularly relevant.
aimsTo compare the use of an intravaginal vibratory stimulus (IVVS) versus intravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) on pelvic floor muscle functionality in women with pelvic floor dysfunctions who cannot voluntarily contract these muscles. MATERIALS AND
methodsRandomized clinical trial performed at a tertiary care hospital from June 2016 to September 2017. The sample comprised adult women with pelvic floor dysfunction who were unable to contract their pelvic floor muscles voluntarily. Women with latex allergy or other allergies in the pelvic region, vaginal or urinary tract infection, gynecological cancer, significant pain on palpation, or pelvic floor training over the preceding 6 months were excluded. After baseline assessment, women that met the inclusion criteria were randomized to receive once-weekly 20-minute sessions of IVVS or IVES for 6 weeks.
resultsTwenty-one women were randomly assigned to each group; 18 completed the IVVS and 17 completed the IVES protocols. The IVVS group presented a significant increase in PFM strength in relation to the IVES group (p = 0.026). There was a significant interaction between time and type of intervention for the same variable (p = 0.008) in the IVVS group.
conclusionBoth techniques were beneficial, but IVVS was significantly superior to IVES in improving pevic floor muscle strength. Additional studies are warranted to consolidate the utility of IVVS as a treatment modality for pelvic floor dysfunction.
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.