The RISE FOR HEALTH study: Methods for in-person musculoskeletal assessment.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the methods for the in-person musculoskeletal (MSK) assessment of the RISE FOR HEALTH (RISE) study, a population-based multicenter prospective cohort study designed to identify factors associated with bladder health (BH) conducted by the Prevention of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Research Consortium (PLUS). METHODS: A subset of RISE participants who express interest in the in-person assessment are screened to ensure eligibility (planned n = 525). Eligible consenting participants are asked to complete a standardized MSK assessment to evaluate core stability (four component core stability test, lumbar spine pain (seated slump test), pelvic girdle pain, (sacroiliac joint, anterior superior iliac spine, pubic symphysis tenderness, and pelvic girdle pain provocation test), hip pain (flexion, abduction, internal rotation and flexion, adduction and external rotation) and pelvic girdle function (active straight leg raise). Participants are also asked to complete the Short Physical Performance Battery to measure balance, gait speed, lower extremity strength, and functional capacity. RESULTS: Detailed online and in-person MSK training sessions led by physical therapy were used to certify research staff at each clinical center before the start of RISE in-person assessments. All evaluators exceeded the pre-specified pass rates. CONCLUSIONS: The RISE in-person MSK assessment will provide further insight into the role of general body MSK health and dysfunction and the spectrum of BH.

The Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation vs. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment: ROSETTA trial.

We present the rationale for and design of a randomized, open-label, active-control trial comparing the effectiveness of 200 units of onabotulinum toxin A (Botox A®) versus sacral neuromodulation (InterStim®) therapy for refractory urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). The Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation vs. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment (ROSETTA) trial compares changes in urgency urinary incontinence episodes over 6 months, as well as other lower urinary tract symptoms, adverse events and cost effectiveness in women receiving these two therapies. Eligible participants had previously attempted treatment with at least 2 medications and behavioral therapy. We discuss the importance of evaluating two very different interventions, the challenges related to recruitment, ethical considerations for two treatments with significantly different costs, follow-up assessments and cost effectiveness. The ROSETTA trial will provide information to healthcare providers regarding the technical attributes of these interventions as well as the efficacy and safety of these two interventions on other lower urinary tract and pelvic floor symptoms. Enrollment began in March, 2012 with anticipated end to recruitment in mid 2014.

Validation of the activities assessment scale in women undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The Activities Assessment Scale (AAS) is a 13-item postoperative functional activity scale validated in men who underwent hernia surgery. We evaluated the psychometric characteristics of the AAS in women who underwent vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: Participants included 163 women with POP and SUI enrolled in a randomized trial comparing sacrospinous ligament fixation to uterosacral vault suspension with and without perioperative pelvic floor muscle training. Participants completed the AAS and SF-36 at baseline and 2 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Internal reliability of the AAS was evaluated using Cronbach α. Construct validity and responsiveness were examined in cross-sectional and longitudinal data using Pearson correlation coefficient and analysis of variance. The AAS is scored from zero to 100 (higher scores=better function). RESULTS: Mean (SD) baseline AAS score was 87 (17.3) (range, 25-100). Functional activity declined from baseline to 2 weeks postoperatively (mean change, -4.5; 95% confidence interval, -7.6 to -1.42) but improved above baseline at 6 months (mean change, +10.9; 95% confidence interval, 7.8-14.0). Internal reliability of the AAS was excellent (Cronbach α=0.93). Construct validity was demonstrated by a correlation of 0.59 to 0.60 between the AAS and SF-36 physical functioning scale (P<0.0001) and lower correlations between the AAS and other SF-36 scales. Patients who improved in physical functioning based on the SF-36 between 2 weeks and 6 months postoperatively showed an effect size of 0.86 for change in the AAS over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: The AAS is a valid, reliable, and responsive measure for evaluation of physical function in women after pelvic reconstructive surgery.