Effectiveness of Pelvic Floor Muscle Training for Urinary Incontinence: Comparison Within and Between Nonhomebound and Homebound Older Adults
To compare the effectiveness of a biofeedback-taught pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) intervention in reducing urinary incontinence (UI) and improving general health-related and UI-specific quality of life in homebound and nonhomebound older adults. We also compared adherence rates to the prescribed PFM exercises and strategies (urge and/or stress) in the 2 groups of subjects.DESIGN:
Secondary data analysis of initial 6-week PFMT intervention data from a randomized controlled trial designed to examine the efficacy of a relapse prevention intervention in sustaining improvements in UI following PFMT.SUBJECTS AND SETTING:
The sample comprised 93 homebound and 185 nonhomebound community-dwelling men and women 60 years and older with urge, stress, or mixed UI at least twice a week for a minimum of 3 months.METHODS:
The intervention consisted of 6 weekly in-home visits during which biofeedback via transcutaneous electromyographic patches was used to teach subjects pelvic floor muscle exercises and, as indicated, stress and/or urge suppression strategies to prevent involuntary urine loss. Incontinence severity was measured by a 1-week bladder diary at baseline and at the end of the 6-week intervention. Health-related quality of life was measured at baseline and postintervention using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (MOS SF-36) (general health-related quality of life), and the Modified Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (MIIQ). Self-reported adherence data were collected at each intervention visit.RESULTS:
At baseline, homebound subjects had significantly more severe UI, more comorbid conditions, and higher levels of functional impairment than nonhomebound subjects. Following the intervention, there was a significant reduction in the number of incontinent episodes in both homebound and nonhomebound subjects, with no significant group differences (P = .25) in the median percent reduction in UI (64.5% in homebound vs 70.4% in nonhomebound subjects). UI-specific quality of life (MIIQ total scores) improved significantly in both groups without any significant between-group differences (P = .83). There were no significant changes in health-related quality of life in either group. Pelvic floor muscle adherence rates were higher than adherence rates to strategies in both groups, with no significant group differences.CONCLUSIONS:
The biofeedback-guided PFMT intervention was equally effective in reducing UI and improving UI-specific quality of life in homebound and nonhomebound community-dwelling older adults.