Reliability of pelvic floor muscle strength assessment in healthy continent women

BMC Urol. 2015 Apr 10:15:29. doi: 10.1186/s12894-015-0017-6.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare pelvic floor muscle (PFM) strength using transvaginal digital palpation in healthy continent women in different age groups, and to compare the inter- and intra-rater reliability of examiners performing anterior and posterior vaginal assessments.

Methods: We prospectively studied 150 healthy multiparous women. They were distributed into four different groups, according to age range: G1 (n = 37), 30-40 years-old; G2 (n = 39), 41-50 years-old; G3 (n = 39), 51-60 years-old; and G4 (n = 35), older than 60 years-old. PFM strength was evaluated using transvaginal digital palpation in the anterior and posterior areas, by 3 different examiners, and graded using a 5-point Amaro's scale.

Results: There was no statistical difference among the different age ranges, for each grade of PFM strength. There was good intra-rater concordance between anterior and posterior PFM assessment, being 64.7%, 63.3%, and 66.7% for examiners A, B, and C, respectively. The intra-rater concordance level was good for each examiner. However, the inter-rater reliability for two examiners varied from moderate to good.

Conclusions: Age has no effect on PFM strength profiles, in multiparous continent women. There is good concordance between anterior and posterior vaginal PFM strength assessments, but only moderate to good inter-rater reliability of the measurements between two examiners.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Body Mass Index
  • Female
  • Gravidity
  • Humans
  • Middle Aged
  • Muscle Strength*
  • Palpation
  • Parity
  • Pelvic Floor / physiology*
  • Physical Examination
  • Prospective Studies
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Urinary Incontinence / physiopathology