4.3 Article

Comparison of parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation and transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in women with overactive bladder syndrome: A randomized clinical trial

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.05.005

关键词

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; Overactive bladder; Urinary incontinence; Quality of life

资金

  1. Fundo de Incentivo a Pesquisa e Eventos - Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre
  2. National Coordination for Improvement of Higher Education Personnel, Brazil

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To compare the effects of parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation with the effects of transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in women with overactive bladder syndrome (OAB). Studydesign: A randomized clinical trial was performed with 50 women aged 40-76 years with symptoms of OAB, divided into two groups: the parasacral transcutaneous electrical stimulation (PS) group and the transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTN) group. Both groups underwent the same protocol, at home, for 6 weeks, applying electrical stimulation three times per week. The tools used for evaluation were the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ), the Overactive Bladder-Validated 8-question Awareness Tool (OAB-V8) and the Incontinence Severity Index (ISI). Statistical analysis was undertaken using independent t-test, Mann-Whitney test, Chi-squared test and generalized estimating equations. Results: After 6 weeks of treatment, OAB-V8 showed a significant improvement in the PTN group compared with the PS group (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.019). Post-intervention, no between-group differences were seen in terms of KHQ domains, average KHQ symptom scale and proportions of categories of ISI. All variables showed a significant effect of time after 6 weeks of treatment for both groups (p < 0.005). Conclusion: Both forms of transcutaneous electrical stimulation seem to be effective and safe for home treatment of women with OAB. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据