Bary Berghmans

Bio: Bary Berghmans is an academic researcher from Maastricht University Medical Centre. The author has contributed to research in topics: Urinary incontinence & Pelvic floor. The author has an hindex of 28, co-authored 84 publications receiving 5842 citations. Previous affiliations of Bary Berghmans include Maastricht University.

An international urogynecological association (IUGA)/international continence society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction

Abstract: Introduction and hypothesis Next to existing terminology of the lower urinary tract, due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for pelvic floor dysfunction in women may be better updated by a female-specific approach and clinically based consensus report. Methods This report combines the input of members of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two Inter

An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction

Abstract: Next to existing terminology of the lower urinary tract, due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for pelvic floor dysfunction in women may be better updated by a female-specific approach and clinically based consensus report. This report combines the input of members of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two International Organizations, the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS), assisted at intervals by many external referees. Appropriate core clinical categories and a subclassification were developed to give an alphanumeric coding to each definition. An extensive process of 15 rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). A terminology report for female pelvic floor dysfunction, encompassing over 250 separate definitions, has been developed. It is clinically based with the six most common diagnoses defined. Clarity and user-friendliness have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in all the different specialty groups involved in female pelvic floor dysfunction. Female-specific imaging (ultrasound, radiology, and MRI) has been a major addition while appropriate figures have been included to supplement and help clarify the text. Ongoing review is not only anticipated but will be required to keep the document updated and as widely acceptable as possible. A consensus-based terminology report for female pelvic floor dysfunction has been produced aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.

Standardization of terminology of pelvic floor muscle function and dysfunction: Report from the pelvic floor clinical assessment group of the International Continence Society

Abstract: STANDARDIZATION This report presents a standardization of terminology of pelvic £oor muscle function and dysfunction. No earlier documents contained de¢nitions on this terminology. These de¢nitions are descriptive and do not imply underlying assumptions that may later prove to be incorrect or incomplete. By following this principle, the International Continence Society aims to facilitate comparison of results and enable eiective communication by investigators performing pelvic £oor muscle studies.

An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for the conservative and nonpharmacological management of female pelvic floor dysfunction

Abstract: Introduction and hypothesis There has been an increasing need for the terminology on the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction to be collated in a clinically based consensus report. Methods This Report combines the input of members and elected nominees of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two International Organizations, the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS), assisted at intervals by many external referees. An extensive process of nine rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). Before opening up for comments on the webpages of ICS and IUGA, five experts from physiotherapy, neurology, urology, urogynecology, and nursing were invited to comment on the paper. Results A Terminology Report on the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction, encompassing over 200 separate definitions, has been developed. It is clinically based, with the most common symptoms, signs, assessments, diagnoses, and treatments defined. Clarity and ease of use have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in all the different specialty groups involved in female pelvic floor dysfunction. Ongoing review is not only anticipated, but will be required to keep the document updated and as widely acceptable as possible. Conclusion A consensus-based terminology report for the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction has been produced, aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.

Pelvic floor muscle training for urinary incontinence in women

Abstract: Background: Pelvic floor muscle training is the most commonly recommended physical therapy treatment for women with stress leakage of urine. It is also used in the treatment of women with mixed incontinence, and less commonly for urge incontinence. Adjuncts, such as biofeedback or electrical stimulation, are also commonly used with pelvic floor muscle training. The content of pelvic floor muscle training programmes is highly variable. Objectives: To determine the effects of pelvic floor muscle training for women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress, urge and mixed incontinence, in comparison to no treatment or other treatment options. Search strategy: Search strategy: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group trials register (May 2000), Medline (1980 to 1998), Embase (1980 to 1998), the database of the Dutch National Institute of Allied Health Professions (to 1998), the database of the Cochrane Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field (to 1998), Physiotherapy Index (to 1998) and the reference lists of relevant articles. We handsearched the proceedings of the International Continence Society (1980 to 2000). We contacted investigators in the field to locate studies. Date of the most recent searches: May 2000. Selection criteria: Randomised trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress, urge or mixed incontinence that included pelvic floor muscle training in at least one arm of the trial. Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers assessed all trials for inclusion/exclusion and methodological quality. Data were extracted by the lead reviewer onto a standard form and cross checked by another. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Handbook. Sensitivity analysis on the basis of diagnosis was planned and undertaken where appropriate. Main results: Forty-three trials met the inclusion criteria. The primary or only reference for 15 of these was a conference abstract. The pelvic floor muscle training programs, and comparison interventions, varied markedly. Outcome measures differed between trials, and methods of data reporting varied, making the data difficult to combine. Many of the trials were small. Allocation concealment was adequate in five trials, and nine trials used assessors masked to group allocation. Thirteen trials reported that there were no losses to follow up, seven trials had dropout rates of less than 10%, but in the remaining trials the proportion of dropouts ranged from 12% to 41%. Pelvic floor muscle training was better than no treatment or placebo treatments for women with stress or mixed incontinence. 'Intensive' appeared to be better than 'standard' pelvic floor muscle training. PFMT may be more effective than some types of electrical stimulation but there were problems in combining the data from these trials. There is insufficient evidence to determine if pelvic floor muscle training is better or worse than other treatments. The effect of adding pelvic floor muscle training to other treatments (e.g. electrical stimulation, behavioural training) is not clear due to the limited amount of evidence available. Evidence of the effect of adding other adjunctive treatments to PFMT (e.g. vaginal cones, intravaginal resistance) is equally limited. The effectiveness of biofeedback assisted PFMT is not clear, but on the basis of the evidence available there did not appear to be any benefit over PFMT alone at post treatment assessment. Long-term outcomes of pelvic floor muscle training are unclear. Side effects of pelvic floor muscle training were uncommon and reversible. A number of the formal comparisons should be viewed with caution due to statistical heterogeneity, lack of statistical independence, and the possibility of spurious confidence intervals in some instances. Reviewer's conclusions: Pelvic floor muscle training appeared to be an effective treatment for adult women with stress or mixed incontinence. Pelvic floor muscle training was better than no treatment or placebo treatments. The limitations of the evidence available mean that is difficult to judge if pelvic floor muscle training was better or worse than other treatments. Most trials to date have studied the effect of treatment in younger, premenopausal women. The role of pelvic floor muscle training for women with urge incontinence alone remains unclear. Many of the trials were small with poor reporting of allocation concealment and masking of outcome assessors. In addition there was a lack of consistency in the choice and reporting of outcome measures that made data difficult to combine. Methodological problems limit the confidence that can be placed in the findings of the review. Further, large, high quality trials are necessary.

An international urogynecological association (IUGA)/international continence society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction

Abstract: Introduction and hypothesis Next to existing terminology of the lower urinary tract, due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for pelvic floor dysfunction in women may be better updated by a female-specific approach and clinically based consensus report. Methods This report combines the input of members of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two Inter

An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction

Abstract: Next to existing terminology of the lower urinary tract, due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for pelvic floor dysfunction in women may be better updated by a female-specific approach and clinically based consensus report. This report combines the input of members of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two International Organizations, the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS), assisted at intervals by many external referees. Appropriate core clinical categories and a subclassification were developed to give an alphanumeric coding to each definition. An extensive process of 15 rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). A terminology report for female pelvic floor dysfunction, encompassing over 250 separate definitions, has been developed. It is clinically based with the six most common diagnoses defined. Clarity and user-friendliness have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in all the different specialty groups involved in female pelvic floor dysfunction. Female-specific imaging (ultrasound, radiology, and MRI) has been a major addition while appropriate figures have been included to supplement and help clarify the text. Ongoing review is not only anticipated but will be required to keep the document updated and as widely acceptable as possible. A consensus-based terminology report for female pelvic floor dysfunction has been produced aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.

Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women

Abstract: Background Pelvic floor muscle training is the most commonly used physical therapy treatment for women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). It is sometimes also recommended for mixed and, less commonly, urgency urinary incontinence. Objectives To determine the effects of pelvic floor muscle training for women with urinary incontinence in comparison to no treatment, placebo or sham treatments, or other inactive control treatments. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (1999 onwards), MEDLINE (1966 onwards) and MEDLINE In-Process (2001 onwards), and handsearched journals and conference proceedings (searched 15 April 2013) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria Randomised or quasi-randomised trials in women with stress, urgency or mixed urinary incontinence (based on symptoms, signs, or urodynamics). One arm of the trial included pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT). Another arm was a no treatment, placebo, sham, or other inactive control treatment arm. Data collection and analysis Trials were independently assessed by two review authors for eligibility and methodological quality. Data were extracted then cross-checked. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Trials were subgrouped by diagnosis of urinary incontinence. Formal meta-analysis was undertaken when appropriate. Main results Twenty-one trials involving 1281 women (665 PFMT, 616 controls) met the inclusion criteria; 18 trials (1051 women) contributed data to the forest plots. The trials were generally small to moderate sized, and many were at moderate risk of bias, based on the trial reports. There was considerable variation in the interventions used, study populations, and outcome measures. There were no studies of women with mixed or urgency urinary incontinence alone. Women with SUI who were in the PFMT groups were 8 times more likely than the controls to report that they were cured (46/82 (56.1%) versus 5/83 (6.0%), RR 8.38, 95% CI 3.68 to 19.07) and 17 times more likely to report cure or improvement (32/58 (55%) versus 2/63 (3.2%), RR 17.33, 95% CI 4.31 to 69.64). In trials in women with any type of urinary incontinence, PFMT groups were also more likely to report cure, or more cure and improvement than the women in the control groups, although the effect size was reduced. Women with either SUI or any type of urinary incontinence were also more satisfied with the active treatment, while women in the control groups were more likely to seek further treatment. Women treated with PFMT leaked urine less often, lost smaller amounts on the short office-based pad test, and emptied their bladders less often during the day. Their sexual outcomes were also better. Two trials (one small and one moderate size) reported some evidence of the benefit persisting for up to a year after treatment. Of the few adverse effects reported, none were serious. The findings of the review were largely supported by the summary of findings tables, but most of the evidence was down-graded to moderate on methodological grounds. The exception was 'Participant perceived cure' in women with SUI, which was rated as high quality. Authors' conclusions The review provides support for the widespread recommendation that PFMT be included in first-line conservative management programmes for women with stress and any type of urinary incontinence. Long-term effectiveness of PFMT needs to be further researched.