Physical activity of men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome not satisfied with conventional treatments--could it represent a valid option? The physical activity and male pelvic pain trial: a double-blind, randomized study

Abstract

Purpose: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a major healthcare burden. Affected patient quality of life is poor and currently no investigated treatments have significant long-term benefit. We performed a preliminary investigation of the role of physical activity and its effects on select patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

Materials and methods: Between 2002 and 2004 we recruited a volunteer sample of 231 eligible males 20 to 50 years old with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome who were unresponsive to conventional treatments and free of any contraindication for moderate intensity physical exercise. This group was screened and, if in accordance with study inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients were randomized into 2 groups. Participants were randomly assigned to the aerobic exercise group (52) and the placebo/stretching and motion exercises group (51). Main outcome measures were the Italian version of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, Beck Depression Inventory, State Anxiety Inventory-Y and a pain intensity visual analog scale administered at baseline, and 6 and 18 weeks.

Results: At 18 weeks 36 subjects (75%) in the aerobic exercise group vs 40 (81.63%) in the placebo/stretching and motion exercises group completed the 18-week program and evaluation. Differences between the 2 groups were found in total National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, pain and quality life impact subscales, and pain visual analog score (ANCOVA p = 0.006, 0.0009, 0.02 and 0.003, respectively).

Conclusions: Improvements in the aerobic exercise group were significantly superior compared to those in the placebo/stretching and motion exercises group. Aerobic exercise represents a valid treatment option and it should be further investigated in a larger study with longer followup.