Comparison of parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation and transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in women with overactive bladder syndrome: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation with the effects of transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in women with overactive bladder syndrome (OAB). STUDYDESIGN: A randomized clinical trial was performed with 50 women aged 40-76 years with symptoms of OAB, divided into two groups: the parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation (PS) group and the transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTN) group. Both groups underwent the same protocol, at home, for 6 weeks, applying electrical stimulation three times per week. The tools used for evaluation were the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ), the Overactive Bladder-Validated 8-question Awareness Tool (OAB-V8) and the Incontinence Severity Index (ISI). Statistical analysis was undertaken using independent t-test, Mann-Whitney test, Chi-squared test and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: After 6 weeks of treatment, OAB-V8 showed a significant improvement in the PTN group compared with the PS group (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.019). Post-intervention, no between-group differences were seen in terms of KHQ domains, average KHQ symptom scale and proportions of categories of ISI. All variables showed a significant effect of time after 6 weeks of treatment for both groups (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: Both forms of transcutaneous electrical stimulation seem to be effective and safe for home treatment of women with OAB.

Effect of intravaginal vibratory versus electric stimulation on the pelvic floor muscles: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: According to the International Urogynecological Association and International Continence Society people with normal pelvic floor muscle function should have the ability to voluntarily and involuntarily contract and relax these muscles. However, many women are unaware of their pelvic floor, and it is estimated that about 30-50% do not know how to actively contract these muscles. Within this context, therapeutic strategies to improve pelvic floor muscle strength and function are particularly relevant. AIMS: To compare the use of an intravaginal vibratory stimulus (IVVS) versus intravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) on pelvic floor muscle functionality in women with pelvic floor dysfunctions who cannot voluntarily contract these muscles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized clinical trial performed at a tertiary care hospital from June 2016 to September 2017. The sample comprised adult women with pelvic floor dysfunction who were unable to contract their pelvic floor muscles voluntarily. Women with latex allergy or other allergies in the pelvic region, vaginal or urinary tract infection, gynecological cancer, significant pain on palpation, or pelvic floor training over the preceding 6 months were excluded. After baseline assessment, women that met the inclusion criteria were randomized to receive once-weekly 20-minute sessions of IVVS or IVES for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-one women were randomly assigned to each group; 18 completed the IVVS and 17 completed the IVES protocols. The IVVS group presented a significant increase in PFM strength in relation to the IVES group (p = 0.026). There was a significant interaction between time and type of intervention for the same variable (p = 0.008) in the IVVS group. CONCLUSION: Both techniques were beneficial, but IVVS was significantly superior to IVES in improving pevic floor muscle strength. Additional studies are warranted to consolidate the utility of IVVS as a treatment modality for pelvic floor dysfunction.