Global Postural Re-education: an alternative approach for stress urinary incontinence?

• Published in: European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 2010-10, Vol.152 (2), p.218-224
• Main Authors: Fozzatti, Celina, Herrmann, Viviane, Palma, Thaís, Riccetto, Cassio L.Z, Palma, Paulo C.R
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdominal Muscles - physiology; Adult; Aged; Biological and medical sciences; Female; Global Postural Re-education; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics; Humans; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases; Obstetrics and Gynecology; Pelvic Floor - physiology; Pelvic Floor Muscle Training; Physical Therapy Modalities; Posture - physiology; Stress urinary incontinence; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - rehabilitation; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - therapy; Urinary system involvement in other diseases. Miscellaneous; Urinary tract. Prostate gland
• ISSN: 0301-2115; 1872-7654
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.06.002

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of Global Postural Re-education (GPR) on stress urinary incontinence symptoms and to compare it to Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT). Study design Fifty-two women with stress urinary incontinence were distributed into two groups: Group 1 (G1) was submitted to weekly sessions of GPR for three months and Group 2 (G2) performed Pelvic Floor Muscle Training four times a week for three months. Patients were evaluated through the King's Health Questionnaire, a three-day voiding diary including daily pad use and a Functional Evaluation of the Pelvic Floor (FEPF), before treatment (T0), at the end of treatment (T1) and six months after treatment (T2). Results The number of leaking episodes dropped significantly in both groups at the end of treatment and at six months follow-up, with a significantly greater decrease in G1. Daily pad use dropped significantly in both groups. At the end of treatment, 72% of the patients in G1 and 41% of the patients in G2 needed no pads and at six-month follow-up, 84% and 50%, respectively. FEPF improved significantly in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups ( P = 0.628). The King's Health Questionnaire demonstrated significant improvement in both groups and in all domains. The GPR group presented higher adherence to treatment, with no dropouts. Conclusions GPR could represent an alternative method to treat stress urinary incontinence in women, should the results be long lasting.