| Title |
Lifestyle advice with or without pelvic floor muscle training for pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-015-2852-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ulla Due, Søren Brostrøm, Gunnar Lose |
| Abstract |
We evaluated the effect of adding pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) to a structured lifestyle advice program. This was a single-blinded randomized trial of women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) stage ≥ II. Participants were randomized to a structured lifestyle advice program with or without PFMT. Both groups received similar lifestyle advice in six separate group sessions. The combined group performed group PFMT after an individual assessment. Primary outcome was a global improvement scale at six-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the global scale and objective POP at three-month follow-up, symptoms and quality of life including sexuality, at three and six-month follow-up. A clinically relevant change of symptoms was defined as ≥15 %. We included 109 women. Eighty-nine women (82 %) completed three months follow-up; 85 (78 %) completed six-month follow-up. At both follow-ups, significantly more women in the combined group reported improvement in the global scale. At the three-month follow-up, the combined group only had significant improvement of POP symptoms while only the lifestyle advice group had significant improvement of quality of life. Change in objective POP and sexuality was nonsignificant. The symptom score improved 17 % in the combined group and 14 % in the lifestyle advice group (P = 0.57). Significantly more women in the lifestyle advice group had sought further treatment at the six-month follow-up. Adding PFMT to a structured lifestyle advice program gave superior results in a global scale and for POP symptoms. Overall effect of either intervention barely reached clinical relevance. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 148 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 57 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 24% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 3% |
| Unknown | 62 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2021.
All research outputs
#5,338,984
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#438
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,354
of 289,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#10
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,750 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.