Efeitos da eletroestimulação intravaginal e da eletroestimulação de superfície em mulheres com incontinência urinária de esforço

• Autor(a) principal: Correia, Grasiéla Nascimento
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFSCAR
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/5163
• topic: Fisioterapia; Assoalho pélvico; Eletroterapia; Eletromiografia; Incontinência urinária; Reabilitação; Electrotherapy; Electromyography; Pelvic floor; Physiotherapy (techniques); Rehabilitation; Urinary incontinence; CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::FISIOTERAPIA E TERAPIA OCUPACIONAL

Several Studies evaluated the effects of intravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) in the stress urinary incontinence (SUI) treatment. However, few studies assessed the effects of surface electrical stimulation (SES), which, according to studies, is effective to SUI, cheap, and less embarrassing to the patient. Despite these advantages of SES, the IVES is the most used type of electrotherapy in clinical practice. Moreover, there are not any studies which compared the effects of SES with the ones of IVES treatment, what justifies the importance of this doctoral studies. Two studies were performed. In the STUDY I the objective was to evaluate and compare the effects of SES e IVES in women with SUI. In the STUDY II, the objective was to verify the effects of SES in the pelvic floor muscle (PFM) electrical activity. In order to performe these studies, were included 45 women, with SUI and who were more than 50 years old. These volunteers were randomized in three groups: intravaginal electrical stimulation group (IVESG, n=15), surface electrical stimulation group (SESG, n=15), and control group (CG, n=15). The IVESG used intravaginal electrode in the treatment and the SESG performed the electrical stimulation with four silicone electrodes, bilaterally fixed in ischial tuberosity and suprapubic region. Both, IVESG and SESG performed 12 sessions of treatment (equipment Dualpex 961), with the same parameters. The CG did not receive any treatment during the corresponding time. In the STUDY I, the volunteers from all the groups performed the evaluation before and after the treatment. In which was performed the 1-hour pad test, the quality of life with the King s Health Questionnaire ad the evaluation of PFM function and pressure with the equipment (Peritron 9300). The STUDY II, which included the SESG and the CG, evaluated SUI severity by the 1-hour pad test, the PFM electrical activity and the quality of life with the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF). The result of STUDY I show that the SES and IVES improved the SUI, PFM pressure and the quality of life. In the STUDY II was verified that the SES treatment also improved the PFM electrical activity. With the result of these studies it is possible to conclude that the SES and the IVES show a similar results and, therefore, both are important option of SUI treatment.