Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of postoperative instructions on physical activity following pelvic reconstructive surgery: a randomized controlled trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Commentary to this article was published on 26 February 2020

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

There is little information on the impact that postoperative instructions have on physical activity to help guide physicians in providing these recommendations after surgery. Our study objective was to evaluate the impact of postoperative instructions on physical activity. We hypothesized that there would be no differential effect of instructions on activity.

Methods

In this randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing prolapse repair were randomized to receive either liberal or restricted postoperative activity instructions between February 2017 and February 2019. Physical activity was measured using the Activities Assessment Scale (AAS) and tri-axial accelerometers measured at baseline and 2 and 6 weeks after surgery. A sample size of 146 patients was planned to compare these activity measurements. AAS scores and accelerometer readings of the two groups were compared using separate variance t tests.

Results

A total of 157 women were recruited between February 2017 and February 2019, including 146 patients with completed study data (n = 72 liberal, n = 74 restricted). There was no difference in physical activity at 2 weeks between the liberal and the restricted instruction groups, as measured by AAS scores (70.47 ± 12.83, 69.54 ± 12.22, p = 0.66), total steps (4,582.20 ± 2,164.5, 5,014.47 ± 3,025.46, p = 0.32), active minutes (4.22 ± 6.17, 4.96 ± 9.65, p = 0.25), and 10-min intervals (0.76 ± 1.11, 0.77 ± 0.93, p = 0.95) respectively. Similarly, there was no difference in activity at 6 weeks between the liberal and the restricted instruction groups. as measured by AAS scores (81.86 ± 8.25, 81.31 ± 10.31, p = 0.72), total steps (6,316.25 ± 3,173.53, 6,589.94 ± 3,826.43, p = 0.64), active minutes (8.79 ± 10.5,11.36 ± 18.18, p = 0.98), and 10-min intervals (1.37 ± 1.34, 1.34 ± 1.40, p = 0.89) respectively.

Conclusion

Postoperative instructions do not have an impact on physical activity measures in patients who have undergone pelvic reconstructive surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nygaard IE, Hamad NM, Shaw JM. Activity restrictions after gynecologic surgery: is there evidence? Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(5):719–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-2026-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Weir LF, Nygaard IE, Wilken J, Brandt D, Janz KF. Postoperative activity restrictions: any evidence? Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(2 Pt 1):305–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000197069.57873.d6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Buckwalter JA. Activity vs. rest in the treatment of bone, soft tissue and joint injuries. Iowa Orthop J. 1995;15:29–42.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Nygaard I, Handa VL, Brubaker L, Borello-France D, Wei J, Wells E, Goode P; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Changes in physical activity after abdominal sacrocolpopexy for advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):570.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.01.044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sung VW, Rogers RG, Barber MD, Clark MA. Conceptual framework for patient-important treatment outcomes for pelvic organ prolapse. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33(4):414–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mueller MG, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Collins SA, Abernethy MG, Alverdy A, Kenton K. Activity restriction recommendations and outcomes after reconstructive pelvic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(4):608–14. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001924.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform 2019;95:103208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. McCarthy M Jr, Jonasson O, Chang CH, Pickard AS, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gibbs J, et al. Assessment of patient functional status after surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201(2):171–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.03.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Barber MD, Kenton K, Janz NK, Hsu Y, Dyer KY, Greer WJ, et al. Validation of the activities assessment scale in women undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18(4):205–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0b013e31825e6422.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Carpenter JS, Heit M, Chen CX, Stewart R, Hamner J, Rand KL. Validating the Postdischarge Surgical Recovery Scale 13 as a measure of perceived postoperative recovery after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(2):86–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Van der Meij E, van der Ploeg HP, van den Heuvel B, Dwars BJ, Meijerink W, Bonjer HJ, et al. Assessing pre- and postoperative activity levels with an accelerometer: a proof of concept study. BMC Surg. 2017;17(1):56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0223-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Collins SA, Tulikangas PK, O'Sullivan DM. Effect of surgical approach on physical activity and pain control after sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):438.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.01.036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut M, Bassett DR Jr. Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1455–60. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078932.61440.A2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gomersall SR, Ng N, Burton NW, Pavey TG, Gilson ND, Brown WJ. Estimating physical activity and sedentary behavior in a free-living context: a pragmatic comparison of consumer-based activity trackers and ActiGraph Accelerometry. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(9):e239. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5531.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Maharaj M, Rao PJ. Physical activity measured with accelerometer and self-rated disability in lumbar spine surgery: a prospective study. Global Spine J. 2016;6(5):459–64. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1565259.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bisgaard T, Kjaersgaard M, Bernhard A, Kehlet H, Rosenberg J. Computerized monitoring of physical activity and sleep in postoperative abdominal surgery patients. J Clin Monit Comput. 1999;15(1):1–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Trost SG, McIver KL, Pate RR. Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11 Suppl):S531–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yaffe K, Barnes D, Nevitt M, Lui LY, Covinsky K. A prospective study of physical activity and cognitive decline in elderly women: women who walk. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(14):1703–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kushi LH, Fee RM, Folsom AR, Mink PJ, Anderson KE, Sellers TA. Physical activity and mortality in postmenopausal women. JAMA. 1997;277(16):1287–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Culligan PJ, Scherer J, Dyer K, Priestley JL, Guingon-White G, Delvecchio D, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing pelvic floor muscle training to a Pilates exercise program for improving pelvic muscle strength. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(4):401–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1046-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nygaard IE, Shaw JM. Physical activity and the pelvic floor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(2):164–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Enoka RM, Enoka RM. Neuromechanics of human movement. 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  25. De Gennaro JD, de Gennaro CK, Shaw JM, Petelenz TJ, Nygaard IE, Hitchcock RW. The relationship between intra-abdominal pressure and body acceleration during exercise. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(3):231–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000523.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Indiana University, 11725 N. Illinois Street, Suite K140, Carmel, IN, 46032, USA

    Divya Arunachalam & Michael H. Heit

Authors
  1. Divya Arunachalam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael H. Heit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

D.A.: project development, data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Divya Arunachalam.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arunachalam, D., Heit, M.H. Impact of postoperative instructions on physical activity following pelvic reconstructive surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 31, 1337–1345 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04239-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04239-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation