Cited by 5Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchUterine Myomas and Treatments

The effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle training on urinary and colorectal-anal distress in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A randomized controlled trial

Open access
Mathew, Seema, Nyhus, Maria Øyasæter, Salvesen, Øyvind, Salvesen, Kjell Åsmund, Stafne, Signe Nilssen, Volløyhaug, Ingrid·2021·International Urogynecology Journal

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) improves urinary incontinence and mild pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We aimed to investigate the effect of preoperative PFMT on urinary and colorectal-anal distress and related quality of life (QoL) in women with severe POP scheduled for surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trial of 159 women scheduled for POP surgery (intervention = 81, controls = 78). Intervention consisted of daily PFMT from inclusion to the day of surgery. Symptoms and QoL were assessed at inclusion, day of surgery and 6 months postoperatively using the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6), Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory (CRADI-8), Urinary Impact Questionnaire (UIQ) and Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire (CRAIQ) (range 0–100). Mixed model statistical analyses were used. Results: One hundred fifty-one (95%) women completed the study (intervention = 75, controls = 76). Mean waiting times until surgery and follow-up were 22 and 28 weeks. There was no difference in mean postoperative symptom and QoL scores (95% CI) between the intervention and control group: UDI-6 16 (12–21) vs. 17 (13–22), CRADI-8 15 (11–18) vs. 13 (10–16), UIQ 11 (7–15) vs. 10 (6–13) and CRAIQ 5 (2–7) vs. 6 (4–9), all p > 0.05. Overall mean scores were reduced from baseline to postoperative follow-up: UDI-6 37 (33–41) vs. 17 (14–20), CRADI-8 22 (19–25) vs. 14 (11–16); UIQ 28 (24–32) vs. 10 (7–13) and CRAIQ 16 (12–19) vs. 5 (3–7), all p < 0.01. Conclusions: We found no added effect of preoperative PFMT on symptoms or QoL related to urinary and colorectal-anal distress in women scheduled for POP surgery. They achieved symptomatic improvement postoperatively regardless of PFMT. Clinical trial registration: The study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov: NCT 03,064,750.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00192-021-04684-3

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Nyhus et al. (2020) and Mathew et al. (2021), neither trial demonstrated significant differences between preoperative PFMT and standard care in postoperative outcomes, including pelvic floor muscle strength, prolapse symptom severity, or quality of life at six months.

    “Despite their methodological rigor and adequate statistical power, neither trial demonstrated significant differences between PFMT and standard care in postoperative outcomes, including pelvic floor muscle strength, prolapse symptom severity, or quality of life at six months.”

    From Pelvic Floor Muscle Training Following Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Recommendation from Scientific Literature (2026) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Discussion reports no added effect of preoperative PFMT on urinary or colorectal-anal distress and related quality of life at six months. It also reports that an earlier publication from the same trial found no difference in muscle strength or prolapse symptoms. The claim is broader than this paper's quality-of-life finding, and its assertion of adequate statistical power is qualified by the Discussion's statement that no power calculation was performed for the symptom and quality-of-life outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Eleven full publications or meeting abstracts published from 2005 until 2021 were included in the review of PFMT in connection with POP surgery.

    “Eleven full publications or meeting abstracts which were published from 2005 until 2021 [62–72] were included.”
  • In Mathew et al. (2021), preoperative PFMT had no added effect on symptoms or quality of life related to urinary and colorectal-anal discomfort in women scheduled for POP surgery; postoperative symptomatic improvements were reached regardless of PFMT.

    “Mathew et al. (2021) [42] found no added effect of preoperative PFMT on symptoms or quality of life related to urinary and colorectal-anal discomfort in women scheduled for POP surgery; postoperative symptomatic improvements were reached regardless of PFMT.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mathew, S., Nyhus, M. Ø., Salvesen, Ø., Salvesen, K. Å., Stafne, S. N., & Volløyhaug, I.
Affiliations
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Corresponding author
Mathew, Seema
Venue
International Urogynecology Journal
Published
2021-02-13
Volume
32
Issue
10
Pages
2787-2794
ISSN
  • 0937-3462 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-3023
OpenAlex
W3127170724
Cited by
4
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Urogynecology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
The Liasion Committee for Education, Research and Innovation in Central Norway (P-101830-1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
Keywords
pelvic floor muscle training, pelvic organ prolapse, prehabilitation, urinary incontinence, quality of life, pelvic organ prolapse surgery, women, postoperative symptoms, pelvic floor dysfunction, UDI-6
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Colorectal Neoplasms, Pelvic Floor, Pelvic Organ Prolapse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review