Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMC Urol ; 15: 29, 2015 Apr 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25888237

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare pelvic floor muscle (PFM) strength using transvaginal digital palpation in healthy continent women in different age groups, and to compare the inter- and intra-rater reliability of examiners performing anterior and posterior vaginal assessments. METHODS: We prospectively studied 150 healthy multiparous women. They were distributed into four different groups, according to age range: G1 (n = 37), 30-40 years-old; G2 (n = 39), 41-50 years-old; G3 (n = 39), 51-60 years-old; and G4 (n = 35), older than 60 years-old. PFM strength was evaluated using transvaginal digital palpation in the anterior and posterior areas, by 3 different examiners, and graded using a 5-point Amaro's scale. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference among the different age ranges, for each grade of PFM strength. There was good intra-rater concordance between anterior and posterior PFM assessment, being 64.7%, 63.3%, and 66.7% for examiners A, B, and C, respectively. The intra-rater concordance level was good for each examiner. However, the inter-rater reliability for two examiners varied from moderate to good. CONCLUSIONS: Age has no effect on PFM strength profiles, in multiparous continent women. There is good concordance between anterior and posterior vaginal PFM strength assessments, but only moderate to good inter-rater reliability of the measurements between two examiners.


Asunto(s)
Fuerza Muscular , Diafragma Pélvico/fisiología , Adulto , Anciano , Índice de Masa Corporal , Femenino , Número de Embarazos , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Palpación , Paridad , Examen Físico , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Incontinencia Urinaria/fisiopatología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA