The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2025
Postisometric relaxation technique versus pelvic floor relaxation exercise in the treatment of women with dyssynergic defecation: a controlled trial.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Büyüktaş Nuriye, Gülcü Barış, Bakar Yeşim, Zeren Melih
Аннотация
AIM: This study aimed to investigate the effects of post-isometric relaxation (PIR) technique and Pelvic floor relaxation exercises (PFRE) on disease symptoms and compare the methods.
METHODS: 42 females with DD were assigned to the PIR (n = 21) or the PFRE group (n = 21), each receiving 8 sessions treatment. Constipation severity (Constipation Severity Instrument-CSI), pain intensity during and after defecation (Visual Analog Scale-VAS), defecation duration, quality of life (Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire-PAC-QOL), pelvic floor muscle function (Electromyography-EMG), sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index-FSFI) and the impact of DD on pelvic floor functions (Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-short form-PFIQ-7) were assessed at baseline, and at the end of weeks 2 and 4.
RESULTS: Defecation duration, pain intensity during and after defecation, CSI and PAC-QOL scores and pelvic floor relaxation activity (p < 0.001) decreased in both groups, with decrease greater in the PIR group (p < 0.001). Pelvic floor muscle contraction activity increased in the PFRE group (p = 0.011), but no difference was found in the second and fourth weeks between the groups (p > 0.005). No significant change was found in the satisfaction score in the PIR group and in sexual desire, sexual arousal, lubrication and satisfaction scores in the PFRE group (p > 0.005). FSFI total (p = 0.001), sexual desire (p = 0.005), sexual arousal (p = 0.004), lubrication (p = 0.012), orgasm (p = 0.020), satisfaction (p = 0.042), and pain (p = 0.001) scores increased more in the PIR group than the PFRE group. PFIQ-7 summary (p < 0.001), Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire (p < 0.001) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire (p = 0.002) scores decreased more in the PIR group.
CONCLUSION: PIR and PFRE may be effective in managing symptoms and improving quality of life in women with DD, with PIR showing potentially greater benefits.
METHODS: 42 females with DD were assigned to the PIR (n = 21) or the PFRE group (n = 21), each receiving 8 sessions treatment. Constipation severity (Constipation Severity Instrument-CSI), pain intensity during and after defecation (Visual Analog Scale-VAS), defecation duration, quality of life (Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire-PAC-QOL), pelvic floor muscle function (Electromyography-EMG), sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index-FSFI) and the impact of DD on pelvic floor functions (Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-short form-PFIQ-7) were assessed at baseline, and at the end of weeks 2 and 4.
RESULTS: Defecation duration, pain intensity during and after defecation, CSI and PAC-QOL scores and pelvic floor relaxation activity (p < 0.001) decreased in both groups, with decrease greater in the PIR group (p < 0.001). Pelvic floor muscle contraction activity increased in the PFRE group (p = 0.011), but no difference was found in the second and fourth weeks between the groups (p > 0.005). No significant change was found in the satisfaction score in the PIR group and in sexual desire, sexual arousal, lubrication and satisfaction scores in the PFRE group (p > 0.005). FSFI total (p = 0.001), sexual desire (p = 0.005), sexual arousal (p = 0.004), lubrication (p = 0.012), orgasm (p = 0.020), satisfaction (p = 0.042), and pain (p = 0.001) scores increased more in the PIR group than the PFRE group. PFIQ-7 summary (p < 0.001), Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire (p < 0.001) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire (p = 0.002) scores decreased more in the PIR group.
CONCLUSION: PIR and PFRE may be effective in managing symptoms and improving quality of life in women with DD, with PIR showing potentially greater benefits.