HORSEBACK RIDING FITNESS MACHINE:DOES IT IMPROVE PELVIC FLOOR MUSCLE CONTRACTION?
Y. YOSHIMURA1, A.FUJISAKI 1, M. SHIMOINABA 1, S. HONDA 1,S. HONGO 2, T. NAKANO 3, M. MITSUI 3;
1Yotsuya Med. Cube, Tokyo, Japan, 2KinkiUniv., Osaka, Japan, 3Panasonic Corp., Shiga, Japan.
Introduction: It has beenreported that 4 months training with a horseback riding fitnessmachine (which spontaneously induces muscle activity in many part ofthe human body by forcing users to maintain balance againsttitubation while in a seated position) improved stress urinaryincontinence (SUI) symptoms and QOL in SUI patients . In thisprevious study, however, it was not determined whether theimprovement in symptoms was associated with a decrease in body weightor with an improvement of PFM contraction.
Objective: Theobjective of this study was to verify whether a new horseback ridingfitness machine (EU-JC70; Panasonic Corporation)  is effective foran improvement of PFM contraction in women with mild SUI.
Methods:Regional women aged 40-60 with standard proportions (BMI 18.5 orhigher and less than 23.0) were recruited. Out of 39 women, 24possible SUI women were screened for entry of the study by using thestatement: “Leaks when you cough or sneeze" in ICIQ-SF(International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-ShortForm). After obtaining informed consent, following parameters wereevaluated as Pre-interventional (Pre) measurement: (1) Vaginalsqueeze pressure assessed by perineometry (Peritron) , (2) Vaginalpalpation: the Oxford grading system, duration of contraction, (3)Questionnaires: ICIQ-SF, I-QOL(Urinary Incontinence Quality of LifeScale,PFDI-20(pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20), (4)Isometric maximum voluntary contraction (MVC):Hip adduction, Hipabduction, Trunk flexion, Trunk extension, (5) Body weight, Body MassIndex (BMI), (6) Waist Circumference. All these 24 women wererandomized as follows. According to the results of vaginal squeezepressure, they were listed in descending order and each top twosubjects were randomly assigned to either the intervention group orthe control group with a probability of one half. Women in theintervention group were required to carry out exercise using thefitness machine for 15 minutes twice or three times a day, 3 days aweek for 13 weeks. Women in the control group were required not toperform any other new regular exercises for 13 weeks. Women in bothgroups were instructed not to increase or decrease their meal sizeand not to learn about or perform any PFM exercises during the studyperiod. Women also recorded the size of each meal and the details ofeach exercise session in a diary to prevent variation in meal sizeand exercise habits. At 13 weeks (Post) after the start of training,the same parameters were evaluated. Data was anonymized and the staffwho performed the measurement and the checking of the diaries wereblinded to the study groups.
Results: One woman in theintervention group dropped out of the study because of personalreasons. In 11 women(intervention group) and 12 women (control group)who completed the study period, the "Pre" and "Post"measurement values were compared and the following results wereobtained: (1) The maximum vaginal squeeze pressure (maximum value of3 times measurements) was significantly improved in the interventiongroup (p<0.05, t-test). (2) Oxford grading scale improved in 4women and decreased in 1 woman in the intervention group. In thecontrol group, it improved in 1 woman and decreased in 1 woman. Theduration of contraction significantly increased in the interventiongroup and there was a significant difference from the control group.(3) The intervention group showed significant improvement in theICIQ-SF scores of "Q1: frequency of urine leakage", "Q2:amount of urine leakage" and "Q3: interference with dailylife." Significant improvement in I-QOL total score was shown inthe intervention group. The PFDIs were preferable from the initialvalue in both groups and no significant difference was shown betweenthe groups before and after intervention. (4) The isometric maximumvoluntary contraction in hip adduction was significantly improved inthe intervention group. (5) There were no significant changes in bodyweight and BMI in both groups. (6) The waist circumference at theumbilicus level significantly decreased in the interventiongroup.
Conclusions: Horseback riding fitness machine(EU-JC70) does improve PFM contraction. This machine can be afeasible and safe device and may provide a new approach for PFMtraining.
References: 1. ICS Glasgo, 2.http://panasonic.jp/fitness/coretra/products/eu-jc70/