Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 99(10): 1320-1329, 2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32386466

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pelvic pain in women is a complex condition, and physical therapy is recommended as part of a broader treatment approach. The objective of this study was to compare structured group-based multimodal physical therapy in a hospital setting (intervention group) with primary-care physical therapy (comparator group) for women with chronic pelvic pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Women aged 20-65 years with pelvic pain ≥6 months and referred for physical therapy were eligible. The primary outcome measure was change in the mean pelvic pain intensity from baseline to 12 months, measured using the numeric rating scale (0-10). Secondary outcomes were changes in scores of "worst" and "least" pain intensity, health-related quality of life, movement patterns, pain-related fear of movements, anxiety and depression, subjective health complaints, sexual function, incontinence, and obstructed defecation. The differences between the groups regarding change in scores were analyzed using the independent t test and Mann-Whitney U test. Sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome was performed with a linear regression model adjusted for the baseline value. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the 62 women included, 26 in the intervention group and 25 in the comparator group were available after 12 months for data collection and analysis. The difference between the groups for change in the mean pain intensity score was -1.2 (95% CI -2.3 to -0.2; P = .027), favoring the intervention group. The intervention group showed greater improvements in respiratory patterns (mean difference 0.9; 95% CI 0.2-1.6; P = .015) and pain-related fear of movements (mean difference 2.9; 95% CI -5.5 to -0.3; P = .032), and no significant differences were observed between the groups for the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the reduction in the mean pelvic pain intensity with group-based multimodal physical therapy was significantly more than with primary-care physical therapy, the difference in the change between the groups was less than expected and the clinical relevance is uncertain.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/terapia , Estrutura de Grupo , Dor Pélvica/terapia , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Adulto , Dispareunia/terapia , Medo , Feminino , Humanos , Medição da Dor , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Qualidade de Vida
2.
Int Urogynecol J ; 30(12): 2101-2108, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31172220

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: St Mark's incontinence score (SMIS) and the Wexner score have been constructed and validated as interview-based scoring systems. We developed a single questionnaire from which a separate SMIS or Wexner score could be derived. This study aimed to demonstrate the level of agreement between self-administered (sSMIS and sWexner) and interview-based (iSMIS and iWexner) scores using this questionnaire. METHODS: One hundred five consecutive patients (30 male) seen in the incontinence outpatient clinics at the Østfold Hospital Trust, Sarpsborg, and University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, completed the self-administered incontinence questionnaire prior to the appointment. Following clinical investigation, the patients were interviewed about their symptoms according to the SMIS and Wexner scores, with the interviewers blinded to the results from self-reported questionnaire. Agreement between total scores and between subscores of the various items were determined using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistics, respectively. RESULTS: The self-administered questionnaire was incomplete in six cases (5.7%) and the interview-based was incomplete in two cases. Agreement was almost perfect between the iSMIS and sSMIS and between the iWexner score and sWexner score (ICC 0.90 and 0.92, respectively). Agreement was substantial to almost perfect for all items in both scoring systems, with kappa values ranging from 0.64-0.94. Mean iSMIS was 9.48 versus 9.53 for sSMIS (p = 0.90) and 8.26 versus 8.44 for the iWexner and sWexner score, respectively (p = 0.42). CONCLUSION: The SMIS and Wexner scores can be completed by the patients using a single questionnaire, and the derived SMIS and Wexner scores are highly consistent with scores obtained by interview.


Assuntos
Incontinência Fecal/diagnóstico , Entrevistas como Assunto/normas , Inquéritos e Questionários/normas , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Noruega , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA