Pelvic Floor Muscle Performance, Hip Mobility, and Hip Strength in Women With and Without Self-Reported Stress Urinary Incontinence.

Autor:	Hartigan, Erin, McAuley, J. Adrienne, Lawrence, Mike, Keafer, Carly, Ball, Abbey, Michaud, Anna, DeSilva, Mary
Předmět:	AGE distribution CHI-squared test COMPARATIVE studies HIP joint RANGE of motion of joints RESEARCH methodology MUSCLE strength MUSCLES PELVIC floor RESEARCH SELF-evaluation STATISTICS T-test (Statistics) URINARY stress incontinence WOMEN'S health DATA analysis DATA analysis software DESCRIPTIVE statistics MANN Whitney U Test
Zdroj:	Journal of Women's Health Physical Therapy; Oct-Dec2019, Vol. 43 Issue 4, p160-170, 11p
Abstrakt:	Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Objective: To describe pelvic floor muscle (PFM) function, hip mobility, and hip strength profiles and compare measures between women with and without self-reported stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Study Design: Descriptive. Background: Women with SUI present with PFM and hip impairments; yet comparative data in asymptomatic women are lacking. Methods and Measures: Adult women with (n = 21) or without (n = 20) SUI, with regular menses, were recruited. PFM performance, passive hip range-of-motion angles, and hip maximum isometric voluntary contractions (Nm/kg) (Biodex) were measured. Values were compared between groups and legs (dominant [Dom] and nondominant [Non-dom]) (significance: P <.05). Results: Women with SUI were older (P <.001), had higher parity, more tender points (Dom, P =.020), greater prone hip internal rotation (IR) angles (Non-dom, P =.025), lesser flexibility per Ober test (Non-dom, P =.013; Dom, P =.050), lower seated hip external rotation (ER) force (Non-dom, P =.008; Dom, P =.033), and lower hip abduction force (Non-dom and Dom, P <.001) than women without SUI. Leg differences for the SUI group were prone hip IR angles (P =.033), seated hip IR force (P =.015), and prone hip ER force (P <.001). Leg differences in women without SUI were PFM power (P =.005), prone hip angles (IR, P =.038; ER, P =.004), and prone hip ER force (P <.001). Conclusions: The lack of significant differences in PFM function between the 2 groups was unexpected. Greater hip strength and mobility along with unique between-leg differences may suggest a coping mechanism in asymptomatic women with similar PFM function as women with SUI. Investigating relationships among PFM and hip profiles and severity of SUI appears warranted. We have included a Video Abstract that highlights interesting findings in our article (see the Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JWHPT/A23) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze:	Supplemental Index
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu