The effect of biofeedback pelvic floor training with ACTICORE1 on fecal incontinence A prospective multicentric cohort pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal incontinence refers to the inability to pass stool in a localized and timely manner resulting in the involuntary loss of intestinal contents such as air, intestinal mucus or stool. The prevalence of fecal incontinence in the general population is approximately 2-21%. Women are more frequently affected than men. Physiotherapeutically guided pelvic floor training, otherwise known as Kegel exercise, is the mainstay of treatment for fecal incontinence. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and potential benefits of a new biofeedback training, which uses a non-insertable pelvic floor sensor with digital interface, called ACTICORE1. METHODS: From January 2020 to April 2021, we conducted a prospective non-randomized multicentric clinical pilot study at the Alexianer St. Hedwig Hospital Berlin (Germany), private clinic Strack (Germany) and the University Hospital Magdeburg (Germany). Patients with fecal incontinence, defined as a Wexner score >2, were recruited and asked to either perform biofeedback training with ACTICORE1 (6 min daily for 16 weeks) or daily Kegel exercise (Physiotherapeutic guidance weekly for the first 6 weeks; biweekly for the remaining 10 weeks). The primary outcome was severity of fecal incontinence after 16 weeks of training assessed using the Wexner score. Secondary outcomes were severity of fecal incontinence after 12 weeks and patients' quality of life assessed using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire after 16 weeks of training. The two-one-sided t-tests (TOST) procedure was used to determine if training with ACTICORE1 has equivalent or noninferior efficacies compared to Kegel exercise. RESULTS: A total of 40 individuals were included. Dropout occurred in 4 cases. The final sample included 19 patients who performed the ACTICORE1 training (ACTICORE-group) and 17 patients who performed guideline-based physiotherapy (PHYSIO-group). Univariate analysis of biometric parameters showed no statistically significant differences. Individuals in the ACTICORE-group were younger (M=46,6 (SD=18,9) years vs. M=57,1 (SD=17,3) years, p=0.093). In terms of endpoint evaluation, a non-inferiority of ACTICORE1 compared to the therapy standard (Kegel exercise) was detected. Both groups showed a statistically significant intraindividual improvement in fecal incontinence as measured by Wexner scoring after 16 weeks. The TOST detected a non-inferiority of ACTICORE1 training (98% confidence interval with equivalence bounds 5 for low and high; Results: 1.36, upper 6.75). CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor training with ACTICORE1 may enable sufficient pelvic floor training as a digital health application. The study at hand revealed a non-inferiority of ACTICORE1 training compared to Kegel exercise.

Investigating the effects of handedness on the consistency of lateralization for speech production and semantic processing tasks using functional transcranial Doppler sonography.

The left hemisphere is dominant for language in most people, but lateralization strength varies between different tasks and individuals. A large body of literature has shown that handedness is associated with lateralization: left handers have weaker language lateralization on average, and a greater incidence of atypical (right hemisphere) lateralization; but typically, these studies have relied on a single measure of language lateralization. Here we consider the relationships between lateralization for two different language tasks. We investigated the influence of handedness on lateralization using functional transcranial Doppler sonography (fTCD), using an existing dataset (N = 151 adults, 21 left handed). We compared a speech production task (word generation) and a semantic association task. We demonstrated stronger left-lateralization for word generation than semantic association; and a moderate correlation between laterality indices for the two tasks (r = 0.59). Laterality indices were stronger for right than left handers, and left handers were more likely than right handers to have atypical (right hemisphere) lateralization or inconsistent lateralization between the two tasks. These results add to our knowledge of individual differences in lateralization and support the view that language lateralization is multifactorial rather than unitary.