Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBø, Kari
dc.contributor.authorDriusso, Patricia
dc.contributor.authorJorge, Cristine Homsi
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-12T12:57:34Z
dc.date.available2023-10-12T12:57:34Z
dc.date.created2023-06-20T10:55:10Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.citationNeurourology and Urodynamics. 2023, 42(6), Side 1261-1279.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0733-2467
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3096158
dc.descriptionThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.en_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Some authors suggest that breathing exercises should be recommended instead of or in combination with pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) to prevent and treat urinary incontinence (UI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Aims: The primary aim of the present study was to investigate the evidence for breathing as an intervention alone or in addition to PFM contraction in treatment of UI and POP. Materials & Methods: This systematic review included short-term experimental studies and randomize controlled trials (RCTs) indexed on PubMed, EMBASE, and PEDro database. A form was used to extract data that was analyzed qualitatively due to the heterogeneity in interventions and outcome measures of the included studies. The individual methodological quality of RCTs was analyzed using the PEDro scale. Results: A total of 18 studies were included, 374 participants from short-term experimental studies and 765 from nine RCTs. PEDro score varied from 4 to 8. Activation of the PFM during expiration was significantly less than during a PFM contraction. In general, the RCTs showed that training the PFM is significantly more effective to improve PFM variables and UI and POP than breathing exercises, and that adding breathing exercises to PFMT have no additional effect. Conclusion: This systematic review indicates that the evidence for incorporating breathing exercise in clinical practice in addition to or instead of PFMT is scant or non-existing, both based on short-term experimental studies and small RCTs.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.subjectbreathingen_US
dc.subjectdiaphragmen_US
dc.subjectexpirationen_US
dc.subjectincontinenceen_US
dc.subjectinspirationen_US
dc.subjectpelvic flooren_US
dc.subjectpelvic organ prolapseen_US
dc.subjectphysiotherapyen_US
dc.subjectrespirationen_US
dc.subjectwomen's healthen_US
dc.titleCan you breathe yourself to a better pelvic floor?: A systematic reviewen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holder© 2023 The Authorsen_US
dc.source.pagenumber1261-1279en_US
dc.source.volume42en_US
dc.source.journalNeurourology and Urodynamicsen_US
dc.source.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/nau.25218
dc.identifier.cristin2156115
dc.description.localcodeInstitutt for idrettsmedisinske fag / Department of Sports Medicineen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel