Conservative interventions for female exercise‐induced urinary incontinence: a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and synthesise what is known about the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical conservative interventions for the management of urinary incontinence (UI) experienced by women during physical exercise. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in the following databases in September 2023: the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Studies were deemed eligible if population consisted of females who reported symptoms of UI while participating in physical exercise, and the interventions involved any non-pharmaceutical conservative treatment to manage symptoms during exercise. The primary outcome was severity of UI signs and symptoms. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022379138). RESULTS: Of the 3429 abstracts screened, 19 studies were retained. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and intravaginal devices were the most commonly investigated modalities. Only two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both among volleyball players, compared PFMT with no PFM exercise, showing a reduction in pad weight gain after the intervention in the experimental groups only. PFMT with and without biofeedback randomised among soldiers demonstrated a reduction in the frequency of urine leakage episodes in both groups, while supervised and unsupervised PFMT randomised among athletes from different sports showed pad weight gain reduction in the supervised group only. Seven single-arm studies suggested that PFMT alone or combined with other modalities may reduce UI severity in active women based on questionnaires, bladder diaries, and self-reported symptoms. A single-arm and a crossover study found pessary use beneficial in reducing urine leakage based on questionnaires and pad weight gain, respectively. When comparing pessary, tampon, and no intervention, two repeated-measures studies found tampons may reduce leakage more than pessaries in CrossFit exercisers and women performing aerobic exercises. A vaginal sponge also reduced pad weight gain during aerobic exercises. Other modalities (i.e., an intraurethral device, photobiomodulation, and combined therapies) were investigated using case series or single case studies. While all interventions showed some evidence of effectiveness, the results must be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations and high risk of bias. In particular, despite a high reliance on pad tests as a primary outcome, we identified inconsistencies in how pad tests were administered and interpreted. CONCLUSION: Only the effectiveness of PFMT to reduce urine leakage during exercise has been evaluated through RCTs, with some evidence of effectiveness. We identified a clear need for higher quality studies, with better reporting on the interventions, and more judicious use and interpretation of outcome measures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».