Mobile app for pelvic floor muscle training for urinary incontinence during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of home-based pelvic floor muscle training in women with urinary incontinence, addressing the difficulties arising from social isolation due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic by utilizing a specialized mobile app. METHODS: This randomized, single-group clinical trial aimed to assess the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training guided by a mobile app (Diario Saúde) in women with stress urinary incontinence. Participants were instructed via telephone to engage in pelvic floor muscle training exercises twice a day for 30 days. Pre- and post-treatment, participants completed validated questionnaires regarding urinary symptoms and quality of life through telephone interviews. Additionally, treatment adherence was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 156 women were enrolled in the study, with a mean age of 49.3±14.2 years. Significant improvements in urinary incontinence symptoms and quality of life were observed following pelvic floor muscle training guided by the mobile app (p<0.001). Notably, 74.3% of the participants reported performing the exercises with appropriate frequency. Of the participants, 62% reported either complete or substantial improvement in urinary symptoms post-treatment. CONCLUSION: This study revealed notable enhancements in stress urinary incontinence, urinary storage, and overall quality of life subsequent to pelvic floor muscle training guided by a mobile app, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The mobile app demonstrated robust acceptance and adherence among women experiencing urinary incontinence.

Habits of Genital Hygiene and Sexual Activity among Women with Bacterial Vaginosis and/or Vulvovaginal Candidiasis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate genital hygiene among women with and without bacterial vaginosis (BV) and/or vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC). METHODS: A cross-sectional study of reproductive-aged women who underwent gynecological and laboratory tests and fulfilled a genital hygiene questionnaire. RESULTS: This study evaluated 166 healthy controls and 141 women diagnosed with either BV (n = 72), VVC (n = 61), or both (n = 8). The use of intimate soap and moist wipes after urination was more frequent among healthy women (p = 0.042 and 0.032, respectively). Compared to controls, bactericidal soap was more used by women with BV (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Some hygiene habits were associated to BV and/or VVC. Clinical trials should address this important issue in women's health.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a higiene genital de mulheres com e sem vaginose bacteriana (VB) e/ou candidíase vulvovaginal (CVV). MéTODOS: Estudo transversal com mulheres em idade reprodutiva submetidas a exames ginecológicos e laboratoriais e preenchimento de questionário de higiene genital. RESULTADOS: Este estudo avaliou 166 controles saudáveis e 141 mulheres com diagnóstico de VB (n = 72), VVC (n = 61) ou ambas (n = 8). O uso de sabonete íntimo e lenços umedecidos após a micção foram hábitos mais frequentes entre mulheres saudáveis (p = 0,042 e 0,032, respectivamente). Em comparação com os controles, o sabonete bactericida foi mais usado por mulheres com VB (p = 0,05). CONCLUSãO: Alguns hábitos de higiene foram associados à VB e/ou VVC. Os ensaios clínicos devem abordar esta questão importante na saúde da mulher.

Fatores associados à incontinência urinária em mulheres pós-parto / Factors associated with urinary incontinence in postpartum women

Objetivo: Avaliar a prevalência dos tipos de incontinência urinária em mulheres após parto vaginal e cesárea, e identificar os fatores de risco associados à presen- ça e à gravidade da incontinência urinária nessa população. Métodos: Estudo de corte transversal com 120 mulheres, 12 a 18 meses após o parto, entrevistadas por telefone com questionários validados sobre sintomas urinários e vaginais. Para análise estatística, utilizamos qui-quadrado, teste de Mann-Whitney e Kruskal- -Wallis, e regressão uni e multivariada. Resultados: Das 120 mulheres incluídas no estudo, 68 (56,7%) tiveram parto vaginal, 23 (19,2%), cesárea eletiva e 29 (24,1%), cesárea após trabalho de parto. A prevalência de incontinência urinária foi de 52,5% e a de incontinência urinária de esforço, de 40%, sem diferença com relação ao parto (p = 0,945 e 0,770). A maioria apresentava incontinência urinária leve (80%), e não houve diferença nas médias dos questionários de incontinência urinária e sintomas vaginais e sexuais e qualidade de vida entre os tipos de parto (p = 0,691, 0,750, 0,262 e 0,779). A prevalência de incontinência urinária esteve associada com idade ≥ 30 anos (p = 0,046) e incontinência urinária durante a gestação (p < 0,001). Com relação à incontinência urinária de esforço, os fatores associados foram incontinência urinária durante a gestação (p < 0,001) e partos vaginais (p = 0,038). Conclusão: Incontinência urinária e incontinência urinária de esforço são muito prevalentes após 12-18 meses do parto, porém sem diferenças com relação à via de parto. Perda urinária durante a gestação e idade maior que 30 anos são fatores de risco para incontinência urinária e incontinência urinária de esforço. A gravidade da perda urinária está associada também a perda durante a gestação e maiores índices de massa corporal.(AU)

Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of types of urinary incontinence in women after vaginal delivery and cesarean section; and to identify the risk factors associated with the presence and severity of UI in this population. Methods: Cross-sectional study with 120 women, 12 to 18 months after delivery, telephone interviews with validated questionnaires on urinary and vaginal symptoms. For statistical analysis, we used chi-square, Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis test, uni and multivariate regression. Results: Of the 120 women included in the study, 68 (56.7%) had vaginal delivery, 23 (19.2%) cesarean section and 29 (24.1%) cesarean sections after labor. The prevalence of UI was 52.5% and SUI 40%, with no difference in relation to delivery (p = 0.945 and 0.770). The majority had mild UI (80%) and there was no difference in the mean questionnaires of urinary incontinence and vaginal, sexual and quality of life symptoms among the types of delivery (p = 0.691, 0.750, 0.262 and 0.779). The prevalence of UI was associated with age ≥ 30 years (p = 0.046) and UI during pregnancy (p < 0.001). Regarding SUI, the associated factors were UI during pregnancy (p < 0.001) and vaginal deliveries (p = 0.038). Conclusion: UI and SUI are very prevalent after 12-18 months of delivery, but no differences regarding the route of delivery. Urinary loss during pregnancy and age over 30 years are risk factors for UI and SUI. The severity of urinary loss is also associated with loss during pregnancy and higher BMI.(AU)

Factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries (VPs) as a conservative treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed during two annual urogynecology and general obstetrics and gynecology meetings in 2017 (São Paulo, SP, Brazil). A 19-item deidentified questionnaire regarding experiences and practices in prescribing VPs for POP patients was distributed among gynecologists. Our primary outcome was the frequency of prescribing VPs as a conservative treatment for POP. The reasons for prescribing or not prescribing VPs were also investigated. Univariate and multivariate analyses with crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were performed for variables associated with the prescription of pessaries. RESULTS: Three hundred forty completed surveys were analyzed. Half of the respondents (53.53%) were between 30-49 years old; most of them were female (73.53%), were from the Southeast Region (64.12%), were trained in obstetrics and gynecology (80.24%) or urogynecology (61.18%) and worked in private offices (63.42%). More than one-third (36.48%) attended four or more POP cases/week, and 97.65% (n=332) had heard or knew about VPs for POP; however, only 47.06% (n=160) prescribed or offered this treatment to patients. According to the multivariate analysis, physicians aged 18-35 years (OR=1.97[1.00-3.91]; p=0.04), those who participated in a previous urogynecology fellowship (OR=2.34[1.34-4.09]; p<0.01), those with relatively high volumes of POP cases (4 or +) (OR=2.23[1.21-4.47]; p=0.01) and those with PhD degrees (OR=2.75[1.01-7.54]; p=0.05) prescribed more pessaries. CONCLUSIONS: Most gynecologists did not prescribe VPs. Younger physician age, participation in a previous urogynecology fellowship, a PhD degree, and a relatively high volume of POP cases were associated with increased VP prescription rates.

Factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse

OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries (VPs) as a conservative treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed during two annual urogynecology and general obstetrics and gynecology meetings in 2017 (São Paulo, SP, Brazil). A 19-item deidentified questionnaire regarding experiences and practices in prescribing VPs for POP patients was distributed among gynecologists. Our primary outcome was the frequency of prescribing VPs as a conservative treatment for POP. The reasons for prescribing or not prescribing VPs were also investigated. Univariate and multivariate analyses with crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were performed for variables associated with the prescription of pessaries. RESULTS: Three hundred forty completed surveys were analyzed. Half of the respondents (53.53%) were between 30-49 years old; most of them were female (73.53%), were from the Southeast Region (64.12%), were trained in obstetrics and gynecology (80.24%) or urogynecology (61.18%) and worked in private offices (63.42%). More than one-third (36.48%) attended four or more POP cases/week, and 97.65% (n=332) had heard or knew about VPs for POP; however, only 47.06% (n=160) prescribed or offered this treatment to patients. According to the multivariate analysis, physicians aged 18-35 years (OR=1.97[1.00-3.91]; p=0.04), those who participated in a previous urogynecology fellowship (OR=2.34[1.34-4.09]; p<0.01), those with relatively high volumes of POP cases (4 or +) (OR=2.23[1.21-4.47]; p=0.01) and those with PhD degrees (OR=2.75[1.01-7.54]; p=0.05) prescribed more pessaries. CONCLUSIONS: Most gynecologists did not prescribe VPs. Younger physician age, participation in a previous urogynecology fellowship, a PhD degree, and a relatively high volume of POP cases were associated with increased VP prescription rates.