Sung M S, Choi Y H, Back S H, Hong J Y, Yoon H
Department of Nursing, College of Nursing Science, Hanlim University, Seoul, Korea.
Yonsei Med J. 2000 Apr;41(2):237-51. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2000.41.2.237.
This study's purpose was to compare the treatment efficacy and the effects on the patients' quality of life of the pelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercise and the functional electrical stimulation (FES)-biofeedback method. Ninety female incontinence patients were randomly selected and evenly divided into three groups: control, intensive PFM exercise, and FES-biofeedback groups. They were treated for 6 weeks. The subjective changes in the severity of incontinence and discomfort in daily and social life were measured using a translated version of Jackson's Bristol female urinary symptom questionnaire. Objective changes of pelvic muscle contraction force were measured by perineometer. Pre and post-treatment maximal pelvic floor muscle contractile pressure (PMC pressure) among the three groups showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). Especially the FES-biofeedback group showed significantly increased maximal PMC pressure compared with other groups (p < 0.001). From the questionnaire, pre and post-treatment changes in the severity of urinary incontinence and discomfort due to incontinence showed significant differences among the three groups (p < 0.001). The level of discomfort in daily life, social activity, physical activity, personal relations and discomfort due to urinary symptoms had largely changed and the FES-biofeedback group, in particular, showed a significant decrease after treatment. In conclusion, when PFM exercise and FES-biofeedback were compared in terms of their effects on the patients' quality of life, FES-biofeedback proved to be more effective than verbal explanation or simple PFM exercise.
本研究旨在比较盆底肌肉(PFM)锻炼与功能性电刺激(FES)-生物反馈疗法的治疗效果及其对患者生活质量的影响。随机选取90名女性尿失禁患者,平均分为三组:对照组、强化PFM锻炼组和FES-生物反馈组。治疗为期6周。采用杰克逊布里斯托尔女性泌尿系统症状问卷的翻译版本,测量尿失禁严重程度以及日常生活和社交生活中不适症状的主观变化。通过会阴压力计测量盆底肌肉收缩力的客观变化。三组治疗前后的最大盆底肌肉收缩压(PMC压力)存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.001)。特别是FES-生物反馈组与其他组相比,最大PMC压力显著增加(p < 0.001)。根据问卷,三组治疗前后尿失禁严重程度及因尿失禁导致的不适症状变化存在显著差异(p < 0.001)。日常生活、社交活动、体育活动、人际关系以及泌尿系统症状引起的不适程度有很大变化,尤其是FES-生物反馈组治疗后显著降低。总之,在比较PFM锻炼和FES-生物反馈对患者生活质量的影响时,FES-生物反馈比口头解释或单纯的PFM锻炼更有效。