↓ Skip to main content

The effects of training by virtual reality or gym ball on pelvic floor muscle strength in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
206 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effects of training by virtual reality or gym ball on pelvic floor muscle strength in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, June 2016
DOI 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0148
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia M. Martinho, Valéria R. Silva, Joseane Marques, Leonardo C. Carvalho, Denise H. Iunes, Simone Botelho

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of abdominopelvic training by virtual reality compared to pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) using a gym ball (a previously tested and efficient protocol) on postmenopausal women's pelvic floor muscle (PFM) strength. Method A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 60 postmenopausal women, randomly allocated into two groups: Abdominopelvic training by virtual reality - APT_VR (n=30) and PFMT using a gym ball - PFMT_GB (n=30). Both types of training were supervised by the same physical therapist, during 10 sessions each, for 30 minutes. The participants' PFM strength was evaluated by digital palpation and vaginal dynamometry, considering three different parameters: maximum strength, average strength andendurance. An intention-to-treat approach was used to analyze the participants according to original groups. Results No significant between-group differences were observed in most analyzed parameters. The outcome endurance was higher in the APT_VR group (p=0.003; effect size=0.89; mean difference=1.37; 95% CI=0.46 to 2.28). Conclusion Both protocols have improved the overall PFM strength, suggesting that both are equally beneficial and can be used in clinical practice. Muscle endurance was higher in patients who trained using virtual reality.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 1%
Unknown 203 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 35 17%
Student > Master 27 13%
Researcher 17 8%
Student > Postgraduate 17 8%
Other 10 5%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 70 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 13%
Computer Science 10 5%
Sports and Recreations 8 4%
Psychology 8 4%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 78 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 November 2018.
All research outputs
#17,902,783
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy
#477
of 673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,961
of 339,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 339,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.