MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414078734 · doi:10.1016/j.cont.2025.102186

262 - Exploring women’s experiences with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain following participation in pelvic floor muscle exercises or pelvic floor muscle relaxation combined with mindfulness intervention programme: a qualitative study

2025· article· en· W4414078734 on OpenAlexaff
Shaza Kadah, S Soh, Mélanie Morin, Udari N. Colombage, Jim Tsaltas, Nyasha Gwata, Benjamin A. White, Helena Frawley

Bibliographic record

VenueContinence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelvic floorRelaxation (psychology)MindfulnessPelvic Floor MuscleIntervention (counseling)Muscle relaxation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypothesis / aims of study Pelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercise is commonly prescribed to women with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain (EAPP). [1] However, women’s experiences with this intervention are unknown. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of women with EAPP regarding PFM exercise, providing insights for interpreting the findings of a randomised controlled trial involving women who participated in an intervention programme that included PFM exercises and mindfulness. Study design, materials and methods This was a qualitative study nested within a pilot randomised controlled trial. Semi-structured interviews, guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability, were performed with participants with EAPP who participated in an 8-week intervention programme. The framework conceptualises acceptability through seven key constructs: affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy. [2] The intervention programme included either PFM contraction-plus-relaxation (PFMC+R) or PFM relaxation-only (PFMR), and both groups also received mindfulness training. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from the trial for this qualitative study. In order to achieve maximum variation sampling, participants with different intensities of general pelvic pain and different adherence levels were sampled. Individual interviews were conducted via videoconference (Zoom™) one to two weeks after the last intervention session. A research team member who was not involved in delivering the intervention conducted the interviews to reduce the likelihood of positive response bias. Interview data were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Direct content analysis was conducted using a combination of deductive and inductive processes. Results A total of 16 participants (PFMC+R=9; PFMR=7) with a mean age of 30 (SD=4.23) were interviewed. Participants in both groups reported positive experiences in terms of the intervention components, delivery mode, exercise progression and perceived beneficial effects on their EAPP symptoms (Table 1). Factors that facilitated engagement with the intervention in both groups included a well-explained programme, tailoring of PFM exercises based on their abilities and pain level, and varying mindfulness recordings. Participants in both groups also identified barriers that hindered their abilities to perform PFM exercises and mindfulness, such as severe pelvic pain and fatigue. Additionally, participants in both groups described strategies to overcome these barriers, such as shortening mindfulness practice, and reducing the number of exercise repetitions during painful days. Some differences in participants’ experiences were observed between groups. For example, more participants in the PFMC+R group perceived that the intervention helped them to better cope with pain, reduce their dyspareunia, and improve their PFM strength. There were also more participants from this group that would recommend the intervention for other women with EAPP. Interpretation of results Although participants from both groups reported positive experiences and perceptions about the intervention, the PFMC+R protocol might be more acceptable and beneficial than the PFMR protocol. Findings from this study also highlight the importance of tailoring PFM exercises to individuals’ pain levels, fatigue, and physical capabilities. Concluding message Understanding participants' experiences and perceptions of the PFM exercises and mindfulness interventions is crucial for evaluating the feasibility and potential implementability of an intervention, as these factors influence engagement, adherence, and overall effectiveness. This qualitative study identified factors that facilitated engagement with the intervention programme, barriers that hindered participant’s abilities to undertake PFM exercises and mindfulness, and strategies to overcome these barriers. However, it is important to acknowledge that the relatively small sample size represents a limitation, as the participants may not be fully representative of the broader study population. Despite this, findings from this study could provide insights into how pelvic floor physiotherapy and mindfulness interventions for women with EAPP can be enhanced in clinical practice and future research. Clinicians and researchers should consider these factors and address challenges that limit the ability of women with EAPP to engage in this intervention programme. Download: Download high-res image (143KB) Download: Download full-size image Figure 1 . Table 1: Themes and subthemes Funding No Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Ethics Committee Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/88754/MonH-2022-330436) Helsinki Yes Informed Consent Yes

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContinenceSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207