Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > Europa Medicophysica 2005 December;41(4) > Europa Medicophysica 2005 December;41(4):297-301

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,827


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  SPECIAL SECTIONMEDITERRANEAN FORUM OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE
Meeting 2004 Guest Editor: Dr. G. Akyuz
FREEfree


Europa Medicophysica 2005 December;41(4):297-301

Copyright © 2005 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Effectiveness of functional magnetic versus electrical stimulation in women with urinary incontinence

Bölükbas¸ N. 1, Vural M. 1, Karan A. 1, Yalçin Ö. 2, Eskiyurt N. 1

1 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Istanbul University Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Istanbul University Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey


FULL TEXT  


Aim. Urinary incontinence is one of the most common medical complaints in women. We here propose to evaluate and compare the effects of 2 conservative treatment modalities, functional electrical stimulation (FES) and functional magnetic stimulation (FMS).
Methods. We studied 22 female patients with urinary incontinence and divided them into 2 treatment groups (14 patients in the FES and 8 in the FMS group). The mean age of the patients in the FES group was 51.14±11.9 and in the FMS group 42.25±6.9 years. Functional electrical stimulation was applied continuously at 10 Hz and 30-50 Hz in urge and stress urinary incontinence respectively. In mixed urinary incontinence stimulation was applied at 10 Hz for 15 min and at 50 Hz for 15 min. The treatment sessions were for 20 min, 3 times a week for 6-8 weeks (12 with mixed, 2 with stress incontinence). FMS was applied by a magnetic chair, twice weekly for 6 weeks (6 with mixed, 1 with stress urinary and 1 with urge urinary incontinence). The efficacy of the treatment was judged from patient impressions, records in urinary diaries, results of 1 h pad test, perineometry value and digital palpation score.
Results. The perineometry value, digital palpation score increased significantly during stimulation compared with prestimulation levels in both groups (P<0.05). For the pad test significant improvement was also noted in both groups (P<0.05). The urinary diaries and frequency of micturition were significantly more cured or improved in the FES group (P<0.05). However, reduction of the frequency of nocturnal micturition wasn't significant in either group (P>0.05).
Conclusion. Both FES and FMS treatments were effective. FMS does not involve intravaginal stimulation and it is twice a week. Although FMS is not often used it is more cost effective than FES. In order to have exact knowledge of this issue; more research than has been done in a greater number of subjects is required.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail