Electrostimulation and pelvic floor muscle training: immediate effect after one single session

Introduction: Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) are physiotherapeutic conservative treatments to prevent and to treat pelvic floor dysfunctions. Objective: To investigate the immediate effect of one session of PFMT versus NMES associated to pelvic fl...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Padilha, Juliana Falcão, Passos, Kamyla Karla Amorim, da Silva, Jordana Barbosa, Driusso, Patricia
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:Brasil
Recursos:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUC-PR)
Repositorio:Fisioterapia em Movimento
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.periodicos.pucpr.br:article/28554
Acesso em linha:https://periodicos.pucpr.br/fisio/article/view/28554
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Pelvic floor. Electric stimulation. Endurance training. Muscle fatigue. Muscle strength.
Descrição
Resumo:Introduction: Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) are physiotherapeutic conservative treatments to prevent and to treat pelvic floor dysfunctions. Objective: To investigate the immediate effect of one session of PFMT versus NMES associated to pelvic floor muscle (PFM) contraction on the PFM function in nulliparous women. Methods: This is a cross-sectional experimental study. Twenty women were randomized into the “PFMT Group” and “NMES Group”. PFM function evaluation was performed by vaginal palpation and manometry before and after a single session. PFMT was composed by one series of eight sustained contractions of 6 seconds and one series of four fast contractions, in four different positions. NMES parameters were: biphasic pulsed current; frequency: 50 Hz; pulse duration: 0.7 ms; cycle on:off 4:8s; rise/decay: 2/2s, time: 20 minutes; and intensity: participant' sensibility. Data was analyzed by the ANOVA two-way for repeated measures to verify the difference between groups, within group and the interactions for PFM function. A 5% probability was considered in all tests. Results: There were no significant differences between groups. At intra-group analysis, there was a significant decrease in the maximal voluntary contraction (p = 0.01), by manometry, between pre- and post-session for both groups. Conclusion: The immediate effects of a single session of PFMT and NMES associated with voluntary PFM contraction are similar on PFM function, that is, no difference was found between groups.