Placement of probes in electrostimulation and biofeedback training in pelvic floor dysfunction

Background. We examined the positioning of five commonly used probes in electrostimulation and biofeedback training. Materials and methods. Ultrasound and MRI were used to evaluate the position of these probes in two multiparous women, in reference to pelvic floor anatomy. Results. From caudal to cr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2006-01, Vol.85 (7), p.850-855
Hauptverfasser: Voorham-van der Zalm, Petra J., Pelger, Rob C. M., van Heeswijk-Faase, Ingrid C., Elzevier, Henk W., Ouwerkerk, Theo J., Verhoef, John, Lycklama à Nijeholt, Guus A. B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background. We examined the positioning of five commonly used probes in electrostimulation and biofeedback training. Materials and methods. Ultrasound and MRI were used to evaluate the position of these probes in two multiparous women, in reference to pelvic floor anatomy. Results. From caudal to cranial we identified the anal external sphincter, puborectal muscle, and levator group. Positioning of probes varied considerably: the recording plates are situated from 1 cm caudal to 6 cm cranial of the puborectal muscle. Most probes stretched, due to a relatively large diameter, the vagina wall, anal external sphincter, or puborectal muscle beyond physiological proportions. On straining, all probes were pushed upwards into the rectum. Conclusion. The positioning of all examined probes varied considerably. Hence it is not likely that these probes give a reliable and uniform registration of muscular activity of the pelvic floor function or are all optimal for electrostimulation.
ISSN:0001-6349
1600-0412
DOI:10.1080/00016340500442456