A randomized physiotherapy trial in patients with fecal incontinence: design of the PhysioFIT-study

Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.
BMC Public Health (Impact Factor: 2.32). 12/2007; 7:355. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-7-355
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Fecal incontinence (FI) is defined as the recurrent involuntary excretion of feces in inappropriate places or at inappropriate times. It is a major and highly embarrassing health care problem which affects about 2 to 24% of the adult population. The prevalence increases with age in both men and women. Physiotherapy interventions are often considered a first-line approach due to its safe and non-invasive nature when dietary and pharmaceutical treatment fails or in addition to this treatment regime. Two physiotherapy interventions, rectal balloon training (RBT) and pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) are widely used in the management of FI. However, their effectiveness remains uncertain since well-designed trials on the effectiveness of RBT and PFMT versus PFMT alone in FI have never been published.
A two-armed randomized controlled clinical trial will be conducted. One hundred and six patients are randomized to receive either PFMT combined with RBT or PFMT alone. Physicians in the University Hospital Maastricht include eligible participants. Inclusion criteria are (1) adults (aged > or = 18 years), (2) with fecal incontinence complaints due to different etiologies persisting for at least six months, (3) having a Vaizey incontinence score of at least 12, (4) and failure of conservative treatment (including dietary adaptations and pharmacological agents). Baseline measurements consist of the Vaizey incontinence score, medical history, physical examination, medication use, anorectal manometry, rectal capacity measurement, anorectal sensation, anal endosonography, defecography, symptom diary, Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale (FIQL) and the PREFAB-score. Follow-up measurements are scheduled at three, six and 12 months after inclusion. Skilled and registered physiotherapists experienced in women's health perform physiotherapy treatment. Twelve sessions are administered during three months according to a standardized protocol.
This section discusses the decision to publish a trial protocol, the actions taken to minimize bias and confounding in the design, explains the choice for two treatment groups, discusses the secondary goals of this study and indicates the impact of this trial on clinical practice.
The Netherlands Trial Register ISRCTN78640169.

Download full-text


Available from: Bary Berghmans, Aug 11, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the psychometric properties of the total Vaizey score and its individual items. The study was conducted as part of a prospective cohort study assessing the outcome of pelvic floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence. One hundred ninety-four patients were analyzed, 53 of whom provided data on the global perceived effect (GPE) score. Pelvic floor rehabilitation resulted in a significant reduction of the total Vaizey score and most individual items. The total Vaizey scores changed in agreement with the GPE scores. The total Vaizey score was responsive, but some individual items yielded inconsistent results for three different measures. The test-retest reliability was adequate or excellent for six individual items and the total Vaizey score. The internal consistency was low for the total Vaizey score at baseline, in contrast to the follow-up and change scores. The estimates for the minimally important change (MIC) and smallest detectable change yielded moderately consistent results. An MIC of -5 points seemed preferable and yielded the lowest misclassification rate. More research is required to confirm conclusions on the psychometric properties of the total Vaizey score and its individual items, and to justify its use in research and routine clinical practice.
    Neurourology and Urodynamics 01/2009; 29(3):370-7. DOI:10.1002/nau.20758 · 2.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as HTML full text and PDF.
    Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 06/2009; 15(4):161-171. DOI:10.1097/SPV.0b013e3181b6e613
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examine the collected evidence for efficacy of biofeedback therapy (BFT) in incontinence and constipation by means of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PubMed search was performed to identify treatment trials that match quality criteria (adequate control groups, randomization). They were entered into meta-analyses using fixed effect models and computing odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of treatment effects. For constipation, eight BFT trials were identified. In four trials, electromyographic (EMG) BFT was compared to non-BFT treatments (laxatives, placebo, sham training and botox injection), while in the remaining four studies EMG BFT was compared to other BFT (balloon pressure, verbal feedback) modes. Meta-analyses revealed superiority of BFT to non-BFT (OR: 3.657; 95% CI: 2.127-6.290, P < 0.001) but equal efficacy of EMG BFT to other BF applications (OR: 1.436; CI: 0.692-3.089; P = 0.319). For fecal incontinence, a total of 11 trials were identified, of which six compared BFT to other treatment options (sensory training, pelvic floor exercise and electrical stimulation) and five compared one BFT option to other modalities of BFT. BFT was equal effective than non-BFT therapy (OR: 1.189, CI: 0.689-2.051, P = 0.535). No difference was found when various modes BFT were compared (OR: 1.278, CI: 0.736-2.220, P = 0.384). Included trials showed a substantial lack of quality and harmonization, e.g. variable endpoints and missing psychological assessment across studies. BFT for pelvic floor dyssynergia shows substantial specific therapeutic effect while BFT for incontinence is still lacking evidence for efficacy. However, in both conditions the mode of BFT seems to play a minor role.
    Neurogastroenterology and Motility 07/2009; 21(11):1133-41. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2982.2009.01345.x · 3.42 Impact Factor
Show more