Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Aug 15:24:e2758.
doi: 10.1590/1518-8345.0926.2758.

Pelvic floor muscle strength in primiparous women according to the delivery type: cross-sectional study

[Article in English, Portuguese, Spanish]
Affiliations

Pelvic floor muscle strength in primiparous women according to the delivery type: cross-sectional study

[Article in English, Portuguese, Spanish]
Edilaine de Paula Batista Mendes et al. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. .

Abstract

Objectives: to compare the pelvic floor muscle strength in primiparous women after normal birth and cesarean section, related to the socio-demographic characteristics, nutritional status, dyspareunia, urinary incontinence, perineal exercise in pregnancy, perineal condition and weight of the newborn.

Methods: this was a cross-sectional study conducted after 50 - 70 postpartum days, with 24 primiparous women who underwent cesarean delivery and 72 who had a normal birth. The 9301 PeritronTM was used for analysis of muscle strength. The mean muscle strength was compared between the groups by two-way analysis of variance.

Results: the pelvic floor muscle strength was 24.0 cmH2O (±16.2) and 25.4 cmH2O (±14.7) in postpartum primiparous women after normal birth and cesarean section, respectively, with no significant difference. The muscular strength was greater in postpartum women with ≥ 12 years of study (42.0 ±26.3 versus 14.6 ±7.7 cmH2O; p= 0.036) and in those who performed perineal exercises (42.6±25.4 11.8±4.9 vs. cmH2O; p = 0.010), compared to caesarean. There was no difference in muscle strength according to delivery type regarding nutritional status, dyspareunia, urinary incontinence, perineal condition or newborn weight.

Conclusion: pelvic floor muscle strength does not differ between primiparous women based on the type of delivery. Postpartum women with normal births, with higher education who performed perineal exercise during pregnancy showed greater muscle strength.

Objetivos: comparar a força muscular do assoalho pélvico em primíparas no pós-parto normal e cesariana, relacionando-a às características sociodemográficas, estado nutricional, incontinência urinária, dispareunia, exercício perineal na gestação, condição perineal e peso do recém-nascido.

Método: estudo transversal realizado entre 50 e 70 dias de pós-parto, com 24 primíparas submetidas à cesariana e 72 ao parto normal. Utilizou-se PeritronTM 9301 para análise da força muscular. Comparou-se as médias da força muscular entre os grupos pela Análise de Variância a dois fatores.

Resultados: a força muscular do assoalho pélvico foi de 24,0 cmH2O(±16,2) e 25,4 cmH2O(±14,7) em primíparas pós-parto normal e cesariana, respectivamente, sem diferença significativa. A força muscular foi maior nas mulheres de pós-parto normal com ≥12 anos de estudo (42,0±26,3 versus 14,6±7,7 cmH2O; p=0,036) e que realizaram exercício perineal (42,6±25,4 versus 11,8±4,9 cmH2O; p=0,010), comparadas às de cesariana. Não houve diferença na força muscular segundo o tipo de parto quanto ao estado nutricional, incontinência urinária, dispareunia, condição perineal e peso do recém-nascido.

Conclusão: a força muscular do assoalho pélvico não difere entre primíparas quanto ao tipo de parto. Mulheres pós-parto normal com maior escolaridade e que realizaram exercício perineal na gestação, tem maior força muscular.

Objetivos: comparar la fuerza muscular del suelo pélvico en primíparas en el posparto normal y cesárea, relacionándola a las características sociodemográficas, estado nutricional, incontinencia urinaria, coito doloroso, ejercicio perineal en la gestación, condición perineal y peso del recién nacido.

Método: estudio transversal realizado entre 50 y 70 días de posparto, con 24 primíparas sometidas a cesárea y 72 a parto normal. Se utilizó PeritronTM 9301 para analizar la fuerza muscular. Se compararon los promedios de la fuerza muscular entre los grupos por medio del Análisis de Variancia de dos factores.

Resultados: la fuerza muscular del suelo pélvico fue de 24,0 cmH2O(±16,2) y 25,4 cmH2O(±14,7) en primíparas posparto normal y cesárea, respectivamente, sin diferencia significativa. La fuerza muscular fue mayor en las mujeres de posparto normal con ≥12 años de estudio (42,0±26,3 versus 14,6±7,7 cmH2O; p=0,036) y que realizaron ejercicio perineal (42,6±25,4 versus 11,8±4,9 cmH2O; p=0,010), comparadas con las de cesárea. No hubo diferencia en la fuerza muscular según el tipo de parto en lo que se refiere al estado nutricional, incontinencia urinaria, coito doloroso, condición perineal y peso del recién nacido.

Conclusión: la fuerza muscular del suelo pélvico no difiere entre las primíparas en lo que se refiere al tipo de parto. Las mujeres posparto normal con mayor escolaridad y que realizaron ejercicio perineal en la gestación, tienen mayor fuerza muscular.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flowchart of the research participants. Itapecerica da Serra, SP, Brazil, 2014
Figure 2
Figure 2. Interaction between education level and the type of delivery on pelvic floor muscle strength (PFMS). Itapecerica da Serra, SP, Brazil, 2014
Figure 3
Figure 3. Interaction between the perineal exercise in pregnancy and delivery type on pelvic floor muscle strength (PFMS). Itapecerica da Serra, SÃO PAULO, Brazil, 2014

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bø K, Hilde G, Stær-Jensen J, Siafarikas F, Tennfjord MK, Engh ME. Postpartum pelvic floor muscle training and pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized trial of primiparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(1):38.e1–38.e7. - PubMed
    1. Thom DH, Rortveit G. Prevalence of postpartum urinary incontinence a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89:1511–1522. - PubMed
    1. Yeniel AO, Petri E. Pregnancy, childbirth, and sexual function perceptions a and facts. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(1):5–14. - PubMed
    1. Lopes DBM, Praça NS. Self-reported urinary incontinence ine the postpartum period clinical characteristics. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2012;46(3):559–564. - PubMed
    1. Findik RB, Unluer AN, Sahin E, Bozkurt ÖF, Karakaya J, Ünsal A. Urinary incontinence in women and its relation with pregnancy, mode of delivery, connective tissue disease and other factors. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2012;21(2):207–213. - PubMed