Urology
Volume 72, Issue 6 , Pages 1280-1286, December 2008

Return to Continence After Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Randomized Trial of Verbal and Written Instructions Versus Therapist-Directed Pelvic Floor Muscle Therapy

  • Katherine N. Moore

      Affiliations

    • Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Katherine N. Moore, Ph.D., R.N., 3rd Floor Clinical Sciences Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton T6G 2G3, Canada
  • ,
  • Luc Valiquette

      Affiliations

    • Université de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • ,
  • Michael P. Chetner

      Affiliations

    • Division of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • ,
  • Stephen Byrniak

      Affiliations

    • Urology, St. Joseph's Hospital, Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
  • ,
  • G. Peter Herbison

      Affiliations

    • Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand

Received 16 August 2007; accepted 5 December 2007. published online 02 April 2008.

Objectives

To test the effectiveness of weekly postoperative pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) versus supportive telephone contact by a urology nurse for men at 4 weeks after radical prostatectomy.

Methods

This was a randomized controlled trial in three Canadian centers. At 4 weeks after surgery, standardized verbal and written instruction about PFMT was provided to all subjects. Randomization occurred after initial instruction. Continence was defined as 8 g or less of urine loss on a 24-hour pad test. Primary outcome was grams of urine loss on pad test; secondary outcomes were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7) score, cost, and perception of urine loss as a problem. Data were obtained at baseline (preoperatively) and at weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 28 and 1 year after surgery.

Results

A total of 216 men were enrolled; 11 were dry or withdrew at 4 weeks. Ninety-nine were randomized to the control group and 106 to the treatment group. There were no group differences at baseline for prostate-specific antigen level (mean [standard deviation] 8.4 [10.4] ng/mL; 7.6 [4.6] ng/mL), Gleason score (6.3 [0.86]), IPSS, IIQ-7 score, pad test, or voiding diary. At 8 weeks 23% of the control group and 20% of the treatment group were continent; at 12 weeks, 28% and 32%; 16 weeks, 40% and 44%; 28 weeks, 50% and 47%; and at 52 weeks, 64% and 60%, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups at any time point for the outcome variables.

Conclusions

Verbal instruction and written information with telephone support seemed to be as effective as intensive PFMT. Less-intense therapy may be more cost-effective.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Funded by the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research, the Northern Alberta Urology Foundation, and Pfizer Corporation (unrestricted).

PII: S0090-4295(07)02605-2

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.034

Urology
Volume 72, Issue 6 , Pages 1280-1286, December 2008