ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2020
Reliability of manometry for assessing pelvic floor muscle function in healthy men.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Extracorporeal Vaginal Peflex Weights for Enhancing Pelvic Floor Function and Relieving Stress Urinary Incontinence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Trial
- Study on 3D High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry Interrater Agreement in the Evaluation of Dyssynergic Defecation Disorders.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Reliability of manometry for assessing pelvic floor muscle function in healthy men.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo the best of our knowledge, no study has examined the reliability of assessment methods for male pelvic floor muscle (PFM) function. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the reliability of manometry with an anal sensor (Peritron cat 9300A) to assess PFM function in healthy men.
methodsHealthy male subjects (n = 21) without urinary leakage underwent testing to assess PFM function, and intra- and interrater reliability tests among examiners were performed. The PFM function included maximal anorectal squeeze pressure, endurance, mean anorectal squeeze pressure, gradient, and area under the curve during PFM voluntary contraction.
resultsParticipants had a median age of 38 years (range 26-51), and a mean BMI of 23.2 ± 2.0 kg/m
conclusionsThis is the first prospective study showing the favorable intra- and interrater reliability of manometry for PFM function in healthy men. Our findings demonstrated that manometry can provide both reliable and reproducible data regarding PFM function in continent men, suggesting Peritron cat 9300A can be used to evaluate the PFM function in men.
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.