RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The International Continence Society (ICS) recommends the use of perineometry and digital palpation to assess the pelvic floor muscles (PFM). Exploring the degree of correlation between both assessment strategies will serve to improve safety for clinical practice. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the correlation between assessment strategies. METHODS: Observational studies were included. Bias risk assessment based on Downs and Black scale and the evidence's level were assessed using the GRADE. The random effect model measured the correlation values and were quantitatively analyzed through meta-analysis. Registration in PROSPERO database - CRD42021253775. RESULTS: Six studies were selected. There was a high positive correlation between perineometry and MOS (r = 0.74; 95%-IC 0.61-0.83; I2: 81%, p < 0.01). Subgroup analysis was performed with 3 studies with continent women, and revealed a high positive correlation (r = 0.80; 95%-IC 0.62-0.90; I2: 90%, p < 0.01), while 2 studies with incontinent women revealed a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.64; 95%-IC 0.48-0.75; I2: 0%, p = 0.40). GRADE analysis revealed a low strength of evidence. CONCLUSION: The high positive correlation between perineometry and MOS suggests that if the assessment strategies are applied in a standardized way, these tests can be used together or separately to assess the functionality of PFMs in clinical practice. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the low strength of GRADE evidence.
