However the confidence interval for the effect was very wide (95% CI –22 to 30) so these data do not clearly rule out clinically important effects. Hung et al (2010) compared the effect of supervised abdominal muscle training and pelvic floor muscle training with unsupervised pelvic floor

training alone and found that abdominal muscle training was associated with a large absolute reduction in risk of self-reported lack of improvement of 30% (95% CI 11 to 47). However this study has several serious limitations including that, while participants in the control group were instructed in pelvic floor muscle training on one occasion, it appears that they did not receive ongoing supervision or feedback so the control intervention was not best practice. In Hormones antagonist addition,

more than half the participants had no leakage on a pad test at baseline. selleck compound Sriboonreung et al (2011) did not find any additional effect of adding abdominal training to pelvic floor muscle training on incontinence, and the confidence interval for this effect (mean difference in pad test result of −1 g, 95% CI −2 to 0) was sufficiently narrow to rule out the possibility that abdominal training conferred clinically significant benefits. In our opinion the evidence from randomised trials is currently ambivalent and does not provide strong support for the effectiveness of abdominal muscle training. Phase: Testing phase. Theory: All sphincters in the body work simultaneously, so exercising the ring muscles of the mouth, eyes, or nose will result in co-contraction and strengthening of the pelvic floor muscles ( Liebergall-Wischnitzer et al 2005). Non-randomised studies: Two research groups assessed whether contraction of the muscles around

the mouth and eyes results in co-contraction of the pelvic floor muscles ( Bø et al 2011, Resende et al 2011). Bø et al (2011) used perineal ultrasound to measure constriction of the levator hiatus and Resende et al (2011) used surface EMG to Carnitine dehydrogenase measure activation of the pelvic floor muscles during the Paula method. Neither research group found any co-contraction of the pelvic floor muscles during contraction of the mouth or eyes. Randomised trials: No trials compared the Paula method with no treatment. Two trials, one a pilot study of 59 women and the other a large trial of 245 women, have been conducted by one group of researchers ( Liebergall-Wischnitzer et al 2005, Liebergall-Wischnitzer et al 2009). In both trials, participants randomised to the group receiving Paula therapy attended up to 9 hours of individualised instruction and practised the Paula method including additional pelvic floor muscle contractions for up to 63 hours at home. Control group participants attended up to 3 hours of group classes and practised pelvic floor muscle exercise for up to 21 hours at home.