The Effect of Telephone-enforced Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercise on Incontinence, Urinary Function Related Satisfaction, Depression, and Quality of Life for Prostate Cancer Patients

Jieun Park; Haejung Lee

doi:10.7469/kjan.2015.27.4.406

Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.27(4) > 1076340

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Park and Lee: The Effect of Telephone-enforced Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercise on Incontinence, Urinary Function Related Satisfaction, Depression, and Quality of Life for Prostate Cancer Patients

Original Article

Korean J Adult Nurs 2015;27(4):406-417.

Published online: NaN August 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7469/kjan.2015.27.4.406

The Effect of Telephone-enforced Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercise on Incontinence, Urinary Function Related Satisfaction, Depression, and Quality of Life for Prostate Cancer Patients

Jieun Park¹, Haejung Lee²

^¹College of Nursing, Graduate School, Pusan National University, Yangsan

^²College of Nursing, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Korea

Corresponding author: Lee, Haejung College of Nursing, Pusan National University, Beomeo-ri, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan 626-870, Korea. Tel: +82-51-510-8344, Fax: +82-51-510-8308, E-mail: haejung@pusan.ac.kr

Received 30 April 201529 July 2015 Accepted 3 August 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of Telephone-enforced Preoperative Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercise (TP-PFME) for prostate cancer patients on Urinary Incontinence (UI), Urinary Function (UF) related satisfaction, depression, and Quality of Life (QoL).

Methods

A non-equivalent control group non-synchronized design was used with 85 participants. The two experimental groups (EG) began the PFME protocol two weeks prior to surgery. The subjects in the EG I received telephone calls to reinforce the PFME protocol. The comparison group began the PFME protocol after their surgery. Data were analyzed by the SPSS/WIN 21.0 using descriptive statistics, x² test, One-way ANOVA, Fisher's exact test, and Repeated measures ANOVA.

Results

EG I showed higher performance of PFME at one (p=.001) and three months (p=.015) after surgery than the comparison group. Comparison group showed significantly more severe UI at one (p=.002) and three months (p=.006) after surgery and reported lower UF related satisfaction than EG I at one month after surgery (p=.015). Participants in both experimental groups reported higher QoL scores (p=.001) at three months following surgery than those in the comparison group. There were no significant differences in depression among the three groups.

Conclusion

The findings from this study suggest that preoperative TP-PFME was effective in decreasing the perceived severity of UI as well as increasing UF related satisfaction and QoL.

Keywords: Prostate neoplasm, Incontinence, Depression, Quality of life

REFERENCES

1.National Cancer Information Center. 2012 Incidence of cancer in men [Internet]. Seoul: National Cancer Information Center;2012. [cited 2013 December 22]. Available from:. http://www.cancer.go.kr/mbs/cancer/subview.jsp?id=cancer_040302000000.

2.Lee SH., Kim JH. Treatment of urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. The Korean Journal of Urological Oncology. 2007. 5(1):16–22.

3.Kim DS., Byun SS., Lee SE., Lee ES., Choi HY., Chung BH, et al. The features and prognosis of korean who underwent radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer. The Korean Journal of Urological Oncology. 2010. 8(1):40–6.

4.Park SH., Cho YS., Kwack MJ., Lee HS., Kang CB. Effect of kegel exercise on urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Adult Nursing. 2013. 25(2):219–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2013.25.2.219.

5.Glazener C., Boachie C., Buckley B., Cochran C., Dorey G., Grant A, et al. Urinary incontinence in men after formal one-to-one pelvic-floor muscle training following radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection of the prostate (MAPS): two parallel randomized controlled trials. The Lancet. 2011. 378(9788):328–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60751-4.

6.Monahan PO., Champion V., Rawl S., Giesler RB., Given B., Given CW, et al. What contributes more strongly to predicting QOL during 1-year recovery from treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer: 4-weeks-post-treatment depressive symptoms or type of treatment? Quality of Life Research. 2007. 16(3):399–411. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-9127-7.

7.Rondorf-Klym LM., Colling J. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy. Oncology Nursing Forum. 2003. 30(2):E24–E32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1188/03.ONF.E24-E32.

8.Lev EL., Eller LS., Gejerman G., Kolassa J., Colella J., Pezzino J, et al. Quality of life of men treated for localized prostate cancer: outcomes at 6 and 12 months. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2009. 17(5):509–17.

9.Cho MS., Kang HY. A comparative study on the effects on urinary incontinence between pelvic floor muscle exercise and magnetic stimulation therapy. Journal of Korean Academy of Community Health Nursing. 2008. 19(4):696–703.

10.Burgio KL., Goode PS., Urban DA., Umlauf MG., Locher JL., Bue-schen A, et al. Preoperative biofeedback assisted behavioral training to decrease post-prostatectomy incontinence: a randomized, controlled trial. The Journal of Urology. 2006. 175(1):196–201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00047-9.

11.Tienforti D., Sacco E., Maramgi F., D'Addessi A., Racioppi M., Gulino G, et al. Efficacy of an assisted low-intensity programme of preoperative pelvic floor muscle training in improving the recovery of continence after radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial. British Journal of Urology International. 2012. 110(7):1004–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10948.x.

12.Lee IY. A study on the relationships between pelvic muscle exercise knowledge, attitudes and self efficacy on mid-aged & elderly women. Korean Journal of Women's Health Nursing. 2003. 4(2):183–200.

13.Moore KN., Valiquette L., Chetner MP., Byrniak S., Herbisn GP. Return to continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a randomized trial of verbal and written instructions versus therapist-directed pelvic floor muscle therapy. Urology. 2008. 72(6):1280–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.034.

14.Centemero A., Rigatti L., Giraudo D., Lazzeri M., Lughezzani G., Zugna D, et al. Preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise for early continence after radical prostatectomy: A randomized controlled study. European Urology. 2010. 57(6):1039–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.02.028.

15.Wagner TH., Patrick DL., Bavendam TG., Martin ML., Buesching DE. Quality of life of persons with urinary incontinence: development of a new measure. Urology. 1996. 47(1):67–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80384-7.

16.Oh SJ., Park HG., Lim SH., Hong SK., Martin ML., Ting BL, et al. Translation and linguistic validation of Korean version of the incontinence quality of life (I-QoL) instrument. Journal of Korean Continence Society. 2002. 6(2):10–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.5213/jkcs.2002.6.2.10.

17.Wei JT., Dunn RL., Sandler HM., McLauhlin PW., Montie JE., Litwn MS. Comprehensive comparison of health related QoL after contemporary therapies for localized prostate cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2002. 20(2):557–66.

18.Chung KJ., Kim JJ., Lim SH., Kim TH., Han DH., Lee SW. Development and validation of the Korean version of expanded prostate cancer index composite: questionnaire assessing health related quality of life after prostate cancer treatment. Korean Journal of Urology. 2010. 51(9):601–12.

19.Yang GJ., Kang JH., Suh IS., Kim HY. Health-related quality of life and depression after radical prostatectomy or hormonal therapy. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2013. 13(4):248–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.5388/aon.2013.13.4.248.

20.Yesavage JA., Brink TL., Rose TL., Lum O., Huang V., Adey M, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 1982-. 1983. 17(1):37–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4.

21.Ki BS. A preliminary study for the standardization of geriatric depression scale short form- Korea version. Journal of the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 1996. 35(2):298–307.

22.Cella DF., Tulsky DS., Gray G., Sarafian B., Lloyd S., Linn E, et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale: development and validation of the general measure. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1993. 11(3):570–9.

23.Kim HS. Development and evaluation of self-care agency promoting programme for prostatectomy patients. International Journal of Urological Nursing. 2011. 5(1):34–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-771x.2011.01113.x.

24.Korean Continence Society. Textbook of voiding dysfunction and female urology. 2nd ed. Seoul: Ilchokak;2009. p. 423–6.

25.Craven RF., Hirnle CJ. Fundamentals of nursing: human health and function. 6th ed.Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;2008. p. 1379.

26.Potter PA., Perry AG., Stockert PA., Hall AM. Fundamentals of nursing. 8th ed.New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Co;2012. p. 1059.

27.Jun SS., Kim DH., Kim MY. Sleep disturbance in prostate cancer patients. The Korean Journal of Fundamentals of Nursing. 2010. 17(2):169–76.

28.Yang BK., Young MD., Calingaert B., Albala DM., Vieweg J., Murphy BC, et al. Prospective and longitudinal patient self-assessment of health-related quality of life following radical perineal prostatectomy. The Journal of Urology. 2004. 172(1):264–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000128775.27331.d7.

Figure 1.

Design of the study.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the Participants (N=85)

Characteristics	Categories	Total (n=85)	Exp. I (n=30)	Exp. II (n=25)	Com. (n=30)	x² or F	p
Characteristics	Categories	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	x² or F	p
Age (year)		68.9±4.1	68.6±4.1	68.5±4.2	69.4±4.3	0.08	.963
	＜70	47 (55.3)	17 (56.7)	14 (56.0)	16 (53.3)
	≥70	38 (44.7)	13 (43.3)	11 (44.0)	14 (46.7)
	(range)	(60~78)	(60~75)	(60~75)	(61~78)
Spouse^†	Yes	83 (97.6)	29 (96.7)	24 (96.0)	30 (100.0)	1.41	.748
Spouse^†	No	2 (2.4)	1 (3.3)	1 (4.0)	0 (0.0)	1.41	.748
Education^†	Elementary school	13 (15.3)	4 (13.3)	4 (16.0)	5 (16.7)	2.71	.867
	Middle school	32 (37.6)	11 (36.7)	10 (40.0)	11 (36.7)
	High school	30 (35.3)	11 (36.7)	10 (40.0)	9 (30.0)
	≥College	10 (11.8)	4 (13.3)	1 (4.0)	5 (16.7)
Income (10,000 won)^†	＜100	37 (43.5)	12 (40.0)	11 (44.0)	14 (46.7)	1.90	.979
	≥100~＜200	30 (35.3)	11 (36.7)	8 (32.0)	11 (36.7)
	≥200~＜300	16 (18.8)	6 (20.0)	5 (20.0)	5 (16.7)
	≥300	2 (2.4)	1 (3.3)	1 (4.0)	0 (0.0)
Subjective health status		6.08±1.73	6.33±1.45	6.20±1.58	5.73±2.08	0.98	.380
Surgery type^†	Open	25 (29.4)	6 (20.0)	11 (44.0)	8 (26.7)	30.67	＜.001
	Laparoscopic	46 (54.1)	10 (33.3)	14 (56.0)	22 (73.3)
	Robotic	14 (16.5)	14 (46.7)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Perceived severity of UI^†	Mild	75 (88.2)	27 (90.0)	22 (88.0)	26 (86.7)	0.84	1.000
	Moderate	7 (8.2)	2 (6.7)	2 (8.0)	3 (10.0)
	Severe	3 (3.5)	1 (3.3)	1 (4.0)	1 (3.3)
UF related satisfaction		43.29±5.94	43.57±5.89	43.16±6.99	43.13±5.18	0.05	.953
Depression^†	＜5 (Normal)	2.84±2.26	2.77±2.34	2.88±2.42	2.87±2.11	0.02	.979
	6~9 (Mild DP)	74 (87.1)	26 (86.7)	21 (84.0)	27 (90.0)	2.24	.795
	≥10 (Severe DP)	9 (10.6)	3 (10.0)	4 (16.0)	2 (6.7)
		2 (2.4)	1 (3.3)	0 (0.0)	1 (3.3)
Quality of life		111.14±15.01	111.37±11.32	115.40±14.60	107.37±17.82	2.01	.141
Quality of life	(range)	(67~136)	(79~128)	(79~135)	(67~136)	2.01	.141

Exp.=experimental group; Com.=comparison group; UI=urinary incontinence; UF=urinary function; DP=depressives;

^† Fisher's exact test.

Table 2.

Effects of Pre-Operative Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercise (PFME) and Telephone Enforcement on the Performance of PFME, Perceived Severity of Urinary Incontinence, Urinary Function related Satisfaction, Depression, and Quality of Life (N=85)

Characteristics	Categories		Exp. I (n=30)^a	Exp. II (n=25)^b	Com. (n=30)^c	Differences between groups		Differences according to the ST	Differences as time passage
Characteristics	Categories		n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	x² or F (p)	Tukey HSD (p)	F (p)	F (p)
Performance of PFME	1M		16.37±2.59	15.20±4.04	13.87±3.30	4.26 (.017)	a＞c (.001)	1.72 (.186)
Performance of PFME	3M		16.23±2.74	14.91±2.64	13.27±3.70	6.89 (.002)	a＞c (.015)	1.27 (.287)
Perceived severity of UI^†	1M	Mild Moderate Severe	24 (80.0)	19 (76.0)	10 (33.3)	15.96 (.002)
			4 (13.3)	4 (16.0)	12 (40.0)
			2 (6.7)	2 (8.0)	8 (26.7)
	3M	Mild Moderate Severe	28 (93.3)	21 (91.3)	20 (66.7)	11.62 (.006)
			0 (0.0)	1 (4.3)	8 (26.7)
			2 (6.7)	1 (4.3)	2 (6.7)
UF related satisfaction	Pre		43.57±5.89	43.16±6.99	43.13±5.18	0.05 (.953)		0.99 (.378)	Group	2.09 (.130)
	1M		37.87±6.17	36.64±6.66	32.93±7.17	4.39 (.015)	a＞c (.015)	0.12 (.888)	Time	62.44 (＜.001)
	3M		42.50±6.35	39.43±8.17	39.00±6.38	2.23 (.114)		0.42 (.661)	GT	3.09 (.017)
Depression	Pre		2.77±2.34	2.88±2.42	2.87±2.11	0.02 (.979)		1.64 (.201)	Group	1.03 (.360)
	1M		3.70±3.47	4.28±3.52	5.53±3.59	2.11 (.128)		0.12 (.885)	Time	40.72 (＜.001)
	3M		1.60±2.06	2.35±3.26	2.43±2.75	0.85 (.431)		0.29 (.753)	GT	1.95 (.107)
Quality of life	Pre		111.37±11.32	115.40±14.60	107.37±17.82	2 2.01 (.141)		2.29 (.108)	Group	3.96 (.023)
	1M		96.17±20.04	92.12±25.98	85.37±20.67	7 1.82 (.169)		0.96 (.387)	Time	91.53 (＜.001)
	3M		113.77±17.68	117.04±21.53	98.60±15.57	7 8.24 (.001)	a＞c (.005),	0.79 (.459)	GT	3.66 (.007)
							b＞c (.001)

Exp.=experimental group; Com.=comparison group; ST=surgery types; PFME=pelvic floor muscle exercise; Pre=pre operation; 1M=Post operation 1 month; 3M=post operation 3 month; UI=urinary incontinence; UF=urinary function; GS=groupsurgery; GT=grouptime;

^† Fisher's exact test.

TOOLS

Similar articles