The effect of pelvic floor physiotherapy (exercise therapy and biofeedback) with weight loss protocol in the treatment of some clinical signs of obese women with urinary incontinence

Determining the effect of pelvic floor exercise and biofeedback with weight loss on quality of life score, severity of urinary incontinence, and pelvic floor muscle performance in obese women with urinary incontinence

Clinical trial With control group Single Blind With parallel groups Non-random assignment

A study is conducted at the Physiotherapy Clinic in Iran University Medical Sciences. Obese women with urinary incontinence are divided into treatment and control groups.The implementation of pelvic floor exercises in clinic and at home is the same in both groups, and the difference in the treatment group is only in the weight loss protocol. An initial assessment is done at the first session and the final evaluation is done in the final session. The distribution of patients will be done according to the order of their referral. Evaluator and data analyzer will be blind to treatment type in groups.

Inclusion criteria: married women with a body mass index of 30-55 kg/m 2; The presence of urinary incontinence at least once a week; Exclusion criteria: genitourinary infection; Pregnancy or delivery history in the last 6 months

Intervention group: The entire course of treatment is 3 months, and pelvic floor exercises are performed once a week in the clinic (by biofeedback device for 30 to 45 minutes) and also daily at home. The weight loss protocol is performed by the patient with recommendations from the therapist for weight loss of about 700 grams per week. Control group: The same as the treatment group, pelvic floor exercises are performed daily at home. Biofeedback exercises are also done once a week at the clinic. This group does not receive any weight loss protocol.

The severity of urinary incontinence; Quality of life;pelvic floor muscles function; Weight; Body mass index

In this study, evaluator, Clinical care and data analyzer were blinded to treatment type in groups. The evaluator evaluated only the patients whom the researcher introduced to her in terms of the criteria of the study and there was no Information about type of treatment who receive. In order to ensure that the evaluator was not informed, the clinical attendant was present at the site and monitored how the evaluator contacted (in order not to be aware of the type of treatment received). Clinical care was only familiar with the patient's name and was completely blind for the type of treatment she received. Due to the patient's coding, The data analyzer also did not have any information about assigning codes to the patients and the type of treatment received by each person.