Comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy program for men with idiopathic chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A prospective study

Thomas A. Masterson, John M. Masterson, Jessica Azzinaro, Lattoya Manderson, Sanjaya Swain, Ranjith Ramasamy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms that causes significant impairment and is often challenging to treat. In this prospective study, we evaluated men with CPPS who underwent comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) program. We used the previously validated Genitourinary Pain Index (GUPI) to measure outcomes. Methods: We included 14 men who underwent physical therapy for idiopathic CPPS from October 2015 to October 2016. Men with clearly identifiable causes of pelvic pain, such as previous surgery, chronic infection, trauma, prostatitis and epididymitis were excluded. Treatment included: (I) manual therapy (internal and external) of pelvic floor and abdominal musculature to facilitate relaxation of muscles; (II) therapeutic exercises to promote range of motion, improve mobility/flexibility and strengthen weak muscles; (III) biofeedback to facilitate strengthening and relaxation of pelvic floor musculature; (IV) neuromodulation for pelvic floor muscle relaxation and pain relief. GUPI questionnaires were collected at initial evaluation and after the 10th visit. Higher scores reflect worse symptoms. Previous validation of the GUPI calculated a reduction of 7 points to robustly predict being a treatment responder (sensitivity 100%, specificity 76%) and a change in 4 points to predict modest response. Data are presented as medians (ranges). Results: A total of 10 patients completed 10 visits, and the remaining four patients completed between 5 and 9 visits. The median National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score at initial evaluation was 30.8 [16-39] and decreased to 22.2 [7-37] at the tenth visit. Five of the 10 patients (50%) in the study had a reduction of greater than 7 points indicating a robust treatment response, and two (20%) had a change of greater than 4 indicating moderate response. Three patients (30%) did not have any meaningful change in NIH-CPSI and the remaining four are in the process of completing 10 sessions. Duration of therapy appears to predict treatment response. Longer duration has better response. Conclusions: Male CPPS is difficult to treat and often requires a multimodal approach. Based on the results of our pilot study, pelvic floor rehabilitation may be an effective treatment option for select patients. A larger study with a control group is needed to validate the routine use of pelvic floor rehabilitation in men with CPPS and predict characteristics of men who would respond to therapy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)910-915
Number of pages6
JournalTranslational Andrology and Urology
Volume6
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2017

Fingerprint

Pelvic Floor
Pelvic Pain
Chronic Pain
Prospective Studies
Prostatitis
Therapeutics
Muscle Relaxation
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Pain
Rehabilitation
Epididymitis
Musculoskeletal Manipulations
Myalgia
Articular Range of Motion
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Exercise
Sensitivity and Specificity
Muscles
Control Groups

Keywords

  • Biofeedback
  • Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS)
  • Chronic prostatitis
  • Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Urology

Cite this

Comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy program for men with idiopathic chronic pelvic pain syndrome : A prospective study. / Masterson, Thomas A.; Masterson, John M.; Azzinaro, Jessica; Manderson, Lattoya; Swain, Sanjaya; Ramasamy, Ranjith.

In: Translational Andrology and Urology, Vol. 6, No. 5, 01.10.2017, p. 910-915.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Masterson, Thomas A. ; Masterson, John M. ; Azzinaro, Jessica ; Manderson, Lattoya ; Swain, Sanjaya ; Ramasamy, Ranjith. / Comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy program for men with idiopathic chronic pelvic pain syndrome : A prospective study. In: Translational Andrology and Urology. 2017 ; Vol. 6, No. 5. pp. 910-915.
@article{c9c0878af8f64bdea13196a95a2da7e1,
title = "Comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy program for men with idiopathic chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A prospective study",
abstract = "Background: Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms that causes significant impairment and is often challenging to treat. In this prospective study, we evaluated men with CPPS who underwent comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) program. We used the previously validated Genitourinary Pain Index (GUPI) to measure outcomes. Methods: We included 14 men who underwent physical therapy for idiopathic CPPS from October 2015 to October 2016. Men with clearly identifiable causes of pelvic pain, such as previous surgery, chronic infection, trauma, prostatitis and epididymitis were excluded. Treatment included: (I) manual therapy (internal and external) of pelvic floor and abdominal musculature to facilitate relaxation of muscles; (II) therapeutic exercises to promote range of motion, improve mobility/flexibility and strengthen weak muscles; (III) biofeedback to facilitate strengthening and relaxation of pelvic floor musculature; (IV) neuromodulation for pelvic floor muscle relaxation and pain relief. GUPI questionnaires were collected at initial evaluation and after the 10th visit. Higher scores reflect worse symptoms. Previous validation of the GUPI calculated a reduction of 7 points to robustly predict being a treatment responder (sensitivity 100{\%}, specificity 76{\%}) and a change in 4 points to predict modest response. Data are presented as medians (ranges). Results: A total of 10 patients completed 10 visits, and the remaining four patients completed between 5 and 9 visits. The median National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score at initial evaluation was 30.8 [16-39] and decreased to 22.2 [7-37] at the tenth visit. Five of the 10 patients (50{\%}) in the study had a reduction of greater than 7 points indicating a robust treatment response, and two (20{\%}) had a change of greater than 4 indicating moderate response. Three patients (30{\%}) did not have any meaningful change in NIH-CPSI and the remaining four are in the process of completing 10 sessions. Duration of therapy appears to predict treatment response. Longer duration has better response. Conclusions: Male CPPS is difficult to treat and often requires a multimodal approach. Based on the results of our pilot study, pelvic floor rehabilitation may be an effective treatment option for select patients. A larger study with a control group is needed to validate the routine use of pelvic floor rehabilitation in men with CPPS and predict characteristics of men who would respond to therapy.",
keywords = "Biofeedback, Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS), Chronic prostatitis, Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT)",
author = "Masterson, {Thomas A.} and Masterson, {John M.} and Jessica Azzinaro and Lattoya Manderson and Sanjaya Swain and Ranjith Ramasamy",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.21037/tau.2017.08.17",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "910--915",
journal = "Translational Andrology and Urology",
issn = "2223-4683",
publisher = "AME Publishing Company",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy program for men with idiopathic chronic pelvic pain syndrome

T2 - A prospective study

AU - Masterson, Thomas A.

AU - Masterson, John M.

AU - Azzinaro, Jessica

AU - Manderson, Lattoya

AU - Swain, Sanjaya

AU - Ramasamy, Ranjith

PY - 2017/10/1

Y1 - 2017/10/1

N2 - Background: Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms that causes significant impairment and is often challenging to treat. In this prospective study, we evaluated men with CPPS who underwent comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) program. We used the previously validated Genitourinary Pain Index (GUPI) to measure outcomes. Methods: We included 14 men who underwent physical therapy for idiopathic CPPS from October 2015 to October 2016. Men with clearly identifiable causes of pelvic pain, such as previous surgery, chronic infection, trauma, prostatitis and epididymitis were excluded. Treatment included: (I) manual therapy (internal and external) of pelvic floor and abdominal musculature to facilitate relaxation of muscles; (II) therapeutic exercises to promote range of motion, improve mobility/flexibility and strengthen weak muscles; (III) biofeedback to facilitate strengthening and relaxation of pelvic floor musculature; (IV) neuromodulation for pelvic floor muscle relaxation and pain relief. GUPI questionnaires were collected at initial evaluation and after the 10th visit. Higher scores reflect worse symptoms. Previous validation of the GUPI calculated a reduction of 7 points to robustly predict being a treatment responder (sensitivity 100%, specificity 76%) and a change in 4 points to predict modest response. Data are presented as medians (ranges). Results: A total of 10 patients completed 10 visits, and the remaining four patients completed between 5 and 9 visits. The median National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score at initial evaluation was 30.8 [16-39] and decreased to 22.2 [7-37] at the tenth visit. Five of the 10 patients (50%) in the study had a reduction of greater than 7 points indicating a robust treatment response, and two (20%) had a change of greater than 4 indicating moderate response. Three patients (30%) did not have any meaningful change in NIH-CPSI and the remaining four are in the process of completing 10 sessions. Duration of therapy appears to predict treatment response. Longer duration has better response. Conclusions: Male CPPS is difficult to treat and often requires a multimodal approach. Based on the results of our pilot study, pelvic floor rehabilitation may be an effective treatment option for select patients. A larger study with a control group is needed to validate the routine use of pelvic floor rehabilitation in men with CPPS and predict characteristics of men who would respond to therapy.

AB - Background: Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms that causes significant impairment and is often challenging to treat. In this prospective study, we evaluated men with CPPS who underwent comprehensive pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) program. We used the previously validated Genitourinary Pain Index (GUPI) to measure outcomes. Methods: We included 14 men who underwent physical therapy for idiopathic CPPS from October 2015 to October 2016. Men with clearly identifiable causes of pelvic pain, such as previous surgery, chronic infection, trauma, prostatitis and epididymitis were excluded. Treatment included: (I) manual therapy (internal and external) of pelvic floor and abdominal musculature to facilitate relaxation of muscles; (II) therapeutic exercises to promote range of motion, improve mobility/flexibility and strengthen weak muscles; (III) biofeedback to facilitate strengthening and relaxation of pelvic floor musculature; (IV) neuromodulation for pelvic floor muscle relaxation and pain relief. GUPI questionnaires were collected at initial evaluation and after the 10th visit. Higher scores reflect worse symptoms. Previous validation of the GUPI calculated a reduction of 7 points to robustly predict being a treatment responder (sensitivity 100%, specificity 76%) and a change in 4 points to predict modest response. Data are presented as medians (ranges). Results: A total of 10 patients completed 10 visits, and the remaining four patients completed between 5 and 9 visits. The median National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score at initial evaluation was 30.8 [16-39] and decreased to 22.2 [7-37] at the tenth visit. Five of the 10 patients (50%) in the study had a reduction of greater than 7 points indicating a robust treatment response, and two (20%) had a change of greater than 4 indicating moderate response. Three patients (30%) did not have any meaningful change in NIH-CPSI and the remaining four are in the process of completing 10 sessions. Duration of therapy appears to predict treatment response. Longer duration has better response. Conclusions: Male CPPS is difficult to treat and often requires a multimodal approach. Based on the results of our pilot study, pelvic floor rehabilitation may be an effective treatment option for select patients. A larger study with a control group is needed to validate the routine use of pelvic floor rehabilitation in men with CPPS and predict characteristics of men who would respond to therapy.

KW - Biofeedback

KW - Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS)

KW - Chronic prostatitis

KW - Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032274037&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032274037&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.21037/tau.2017.08.17

DO - 10.21037/tau.2017.08.17

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85032274037

VL - 6

SP - 910

EP - 915

JO - Translational Andrology and Urology

JF - Translational Andrology and Urology

SN - 2223-4683

IS - 5

ER -