Effects of external electrical stimulation added to pelvic floor muscle training in women with stress urinary incontinence: A randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, the combination of external electrical stimulation (EES) with pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) was assessed to determine if it yielded better results than PFMT or EES alone for treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-one women with SUI were randomly allocated to EES + PFMT (n = 17), PFMT (n = 17), or EES groups (n = 17) for 8 weeks of treatment. Personal, demographic, and clinical characteristics of the patients were recorded. Outcome measures included self-reported improvement, severity of incontinence, symptom distress, quality of life (QOL), urinary incontinence episodes, pelvic floor muscle strength (PFMS) and endurance (PFME) and dysfunction. All evaluations were made pre- and posttreatment. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square, marginal homogeneity, Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon signed-rank or paired t test and Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc tests. RESULTS: In the 8th week, there were significant changes in self-reported improvement, severity of incontinence, symptom distress score, urinary incontinence episodes, PFMS, PFME, pelvic floor dysfunction and all areas of QoL in all groups (p < 0.05). Combined therapy was not superior to PFMT and EES for overall outcome measures, except for the incontinence impact subdomain of the QoL score (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the idea that PFMT should be preferred as the first line therapy for women with SUI. However, the acceptable EES method can be recommended in addition to PFMT to increase motivation and treatment compliance in patients with insufficient or inaccurate pelvic floor muscle contractions.

Discriminative Ability of the Four Balance Measures for Previous Fall Experience in Turkish Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the discriminative properties (discriminative effect, sensitivity, specificity, and cutoff values) of four commonly used balance measures for nonfallers, fallers, and multiple fallers among Turkish community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: Three hundred fifty-one community-dwelling older adults (122 fallers and 229 nonfallers) were evaluated with the timed up and go test, functional reach test, one-leg stance test, and Berg Balance Scale (BBS). RESULTS: Timed up and go test and functional reach test were not sensitive in detecting group differences between fallers and nonfallers, and BBS and one-leg stance test had significant but limited discriminative power with cutoff values of 53.5 points and 7.50 s, respectively. In addition, timed up and go test, functional reach test, and one-leg stance test had significant but limited discriminative power, and BBS had acceptable discriminative power for older adults who fell multiple times. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that BBS is the most suitable tool for assessing the fall risk of Turkish community-dwelling older adults.