This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Prasad, R S Articles by Wright, H Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Prasad, R S Articles by Wright, H Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Lower abdominal pressure versus external bladder stimulation to aid bladder emptying in multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled study

S J Smith

H Wright

Neurorehabilitation Unit, Astley Ainslie Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland

Objective: To investigate the change in post-void residual bladder volumes (PVR) with ‘abdominal vibration’ using a percutaneous bladder stimulator in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients compared with either ‘no treatment’ or ‘abdominal pressure’.

Design: Randomized controlled cross-over study. Setting: Regional neurorehabilitation clinics.

Subjects: Twenty-eight MS patients with urinary symptoms and PVR > 100 ml. Twelve patients had urinary incontinence.

Methods: MS patients with voiding dysfunction and elevated PVR of 100–500 ml on BVI-3000 Ultrasound Scanner were randomized to either ‘abdominal pressure’ or ‘vibration’ by a portable, percutaneous, vibrating device (Queen Square Bladder Stimulator; Malem Medical) or to ‘no treatment’. PVR was assessed at the end of each two-week phase.

Outcome measure: PVR reduction by greater than 100 ml.

Results: The 28 patients ranged in age from 29 to 71 years with a mean age of 49 years and a mean duration of MS of 12 years (range 1–37 years). The PVR decreased from 231 (SD 119) ml during no treatment to 191 (SD 132) ml with abdominal pressure (p = 0.242). Using suprapubic vibration the PVR reduced further to 126 (SD 121) ml, which was highly significant (p = 0.002) compared with no treatment. The difference between abdominal pressure and vibration just failed to reach significance (p = 0.059). There was no significant reduction in either the frequency of micturition or episodes of incontinence. The device was well-tolerated by patients.

Conclusion: Abdominal vibration is an effective method of reducing PVR in MS patients and appears more effective than abdominal pressure alone.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 17, No. 1, 42-47 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215503cr583oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C J Fowler, J N Panicker, M Drake, C Harris, S C W Harrison, M Kirby, M Lucas, N Macleod, J Mangnall, A North, et al. A UK consensus on the management of the bladder in multiple sclerosis Postgrad. Med. J., October 1, 2009; 85(1008): 552 - 559. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C J Fowler, J N Panicker, M Drake, C Harris, S C W Harrison, M Kirby, M Lucas, N Macleod, J Mangnall, A North, et al. A UK consensus on the management of the bladder in multiple sclerosis J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, May 1, 2009; 80(5): 470 - 477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P Davies, R Greenwood, and J Benger Randomised trial of a vibrating bladder stimulator - the time to pee study Arch. Dis. Child., May 1, 2008; 93(5): 423 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]