Pfilates and Hypopressives for the Treatment of Urinary Incontinence After Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence (UI) is an important side effect of radical prostatectomy (RP). Coactivation of surrounding muscles via novel techniques for pelvic floor rehabilitation known as Pfilates and Hypopressives has not been compared to pelvic floor muscle exercises (PFMXs) for UI. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of isolated PFMXs with and without the addition of Pfilates and Hypopressives on UI recovery following RP. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a community and tertiary cancer center in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 226 patients undergoing RP were assessed for eligibility. One hundred twenty-two patients were eligible and 50 consented to participate; 37 participants completed the trial. METHODS: Participants were randomized to either isolated PFMX (control) or PFMX plus Pfilates and Hypopressives (advanced pelvic floor exercises; APFX) groups. PFMX participants (n = 25) received instructions for isolated pelvic floor contractions starting with 30 contractions per day during weeks 1 to 2 up to 180 per day for weeks 7 to 26. The APFX group (n = 25) received a comparable volume of exercises. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Feasibility was assessed by rates of recruitment, adverse events, and study-arm compliance. Information about UI and quality of life was collected 1 week before surgery and at 2, 6, 12, and 26 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: The recruitment rate was 41%, adherence to the PFMXs and APFXs was >70%, and there were no reported adverse events. Between-group differences were observed in the frequency of self-reported 24-hour urinary leakage (rate ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.98) and during waking hours (rate ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.91) at 26 weeks after surgery favoring APFX. CONCLUSIONS: Pfilates and Hypopressives are feasible in men undergoing RP, and preliminary data suggest a potential benefit in aiding recovery of urinary control. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".