Assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms 6 weeks after delivery and the relationship of pelvic floor muscle function

Assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms 6 weeks after delivery and the relationship of pelvic floor muscle function | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms 6 weeks after delivery and the relationship of pelvic floor muscle function lei zhang, Xiaoxiao Wang, Xinnan Hou, Xinrong Zhuang, Yu Wang, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background There are few studies of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in women with different modes of delivery after 42 days. It is doubtful whether the onset of LUTS is related to the decline of pelvic muscle function after delivery. Methods This was an observational study conducted at Peking University First Hospital from 2019 to 2022. A total of 2462 women were recruited and interviewed 42 days after delivery using questionnaires, and gynecological physical examinations and pelvic floor muscle screening were performed. A modified Chinese Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms questionnaire was administered. The participants were asked about the presence of individual LUTS and rated the level of bother caused by those symptoms. Descriptive statistics, χ 2 tests, one-way ANOVA and multivariate logistic regressions were used for data analysis. Results The prevalence of any LUTS, storage symptoms, or voiding symptoms was 70.6%, 65.4%, and 23.0%, respectively. Nocturia was the most common symptom (35.4%), followed by frequency (25.6%), urgency (25.3%) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI; 20.8%). Nocturia and frequency were not frequently rated as bothersome (38.0%, 21.5%). Urinary incontinence (UI) was the most frequently reported as severely bothersome (SUI 15.6%, urge urinary incontinence (UUI) 15.3%). Vaginal delivery (VD) and forceps delivery (FD) were strong predictors of LUTS ( P < 0.05). Compared with cesarean section (CS), VD, especially FD, was associated with lower surface electromyography (sEMG) activity, including resting baseline and contraction amplitude ( P < 0.001 ). Conclusions More than half of women experienced LUTS 42 days after delivery. Nocturia, frequency, urgency, and SUI were the most prevalent LUTS. Straining and UI were most frequently reported as bothersome, while UI caused severe discomfort. VD, especially FD, was more likely to cause pelvic floor muscle or nerve damage and was the strongest predictor of storage LUTS. Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) Prevalence Potential risk factors Bother Pelvic floor muscle function Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1. Background Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) have attracted substantial attention in recent years, partly due to their high prevalence but primarily because of the heightened awareness of their detrimental impact on health-related quality of life 1 . While LUTS are common in women and have a negative impact on quality of life, most women do not seek treatment 2,3 . While numerous effective treatment options for LUTS exist, there is sparse evidence informing optimal bladder health promotion and LUTS prevention strategies. Most primary prevention trials focus purely on one particular symptom. Evidence supports the use of pelvic floor exercise programs for the prevention of urinary incontinence (UI) during pregnancy, but outcomes for other LUTS, such as voiding dysfunction or pain, are unknown 4–7 . Pregnancy and vaginal birth are known risk factors for UI secondary to pelvic floor musculature and nerve injury 8–11 . The postpartum period is a time in which women recover and take on new roles. Some traditional practices are observed to ensure recovery and prevent ill health in later years 12 . UI can be prevented and promoted at this important time. However, there are few data on LUTS in these women. By examining the effects of labor management practices on urological outcomes across this important time, researchers will be well positioned to inform policies and practices governing maternity care. The aim of this study was to provide estimates of the prevalence and potential risk factors for LUTS and the burden they impose on women with different modes of delivery after afte 6 weeks and the relationship between pelvic floor function and different kinds of LUTS. 2. Methods 2.1. Study design and participants Beginning in January 2019, we collected data from women who had postpartum reviews at 6 weeks after delivery in outpatient clinics at Peking University First Hospital. The eligibility criteria stipulated postpartum women without urinary incontinence before pregnancy. We excluded women who: (a) were medically diagnosed with cognitive impairments and who could not understand the questions,(b) had parity ≥ 3,(c) with multiple pregnancy,(d) combined with pelvic organ prolapse(Stage 2 or higher),(e) with history of anti-incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery or urinary surgery history;(f) with malignant tumor,(g) with urinary tract infection,(h) do not want to participate. Questionnaires were used to investigate these women. They also underwent a gynecological examination and pelvic floor muscle screening (PFM screening). Ethics committee approval and oral consent were obtained. The participants were asked to complete this questionnaire every year after delivery. We calculated the sample size according to our previous national study 13 . We aimed to survey at least 3 different delivery modes. A minimal sample size was calculated to detect a 55.5% prevalence of LUTS, with a 5% estimated error and a 95% confidence interval (CI). Considering a 20% refusal rate, a total of 1367 participants would be required for the LUTS reanalysis according to this formula: N = Z α/2 2 × (π × (1 − π)) / δ 2 × 3 × (1 + 20%) = 1.96 2 × (55.5% × (1–55.5%)) / 0.05 2 × 3× (1 + 20%) ≈ 1367. 2.2. Measurements We used a Chinese version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire–Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-FLUTS) 14 . This questionnaire included an assessment of 10 types of LUTS: nocturia, daytime frequency, urgency, UUI, SUI, other incontinence, pain or burning, hesitancy, straining, and intermittency. Participants were asked to rate how often individual LUTS were experienced and, if LUTS were experienced, to what degree the symptoms were bothersome. The prevalence of other LUTS was defined by answers other than no . The bother associated with each symptom was evaluated using a scale ranging from 0 (not bothered at all) to 10 (greatly bothered). Bother was also defined by dividing the Likert responses into three groups: minor (scores of 1–4), moderate (scores of 5–7), and severe (scores of 8–10). Information on sociodemographic background, reproductive factors, defecation, and medical conditions was also collected in detail. 2.3. Diagnostic criteria The definitions in this study were consistent with the standards recommended by the 2002 International Continence Society (ICS) guidelines 15 . In our study, nocturia was defined as two or more micturitions per night. Daytime frequency was defined as voiding eight times or more per day. Those who reported UI without symptoms of UUI or SUI were categorized as having other UI. Cesarean section performed after cervical dilation ≥ 1cm were categorized as CS in labor, otherwise, it is defined as CS not in labor. 2.4 Pelvic floor muscle screening (PFM screening) All participants underwent a gynecological physical examination and PFM screening. The bioelectrical activity of the PFMs was recorded using equipment (Nanjing Medlander Company, China) following the Glazer protocols 16 . The patient was placed in the supine position, and the hips and knees were gently flexed. Two monitoring electrodes were placed on the iliac region, and the other two electrodes were placed on the two sides of the hypogastric region. After the vaginal electrode was placed, participants were asked to perform a series of contraction and relaxation actions according to voice commands. The following surface electromyography (sEMG) signal parameters were recorded: ( 1 ) one 60-s rest time (prebaseline): the average mean amplitude (µV) and mean amplitude variability (%); ( 2 ) five 2-s phasic (flick) contractions with a 2-s rest time: the average peak amplitude (µV), time before peak (s) and time after peak (s); ( 3 ) five 10-s tonic contractions, with a 10-s rest between each: the average mean amplitude (µV) and mean amplitude variability (%); and ( 4 ) one 60-s rest time (postbaseline): the average mean amplitude (µV) and mean amplitude variability (%). 2.5. Statistical analysis We performed χ 2 tests to compare the prevalence differences between the groups. A multivariable model was set up to assess bother and individual LUTS-related potential risk factors and to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs; this model was adapted for all factors in the final version. A two-sided P value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. One-way ANOVA was used with Bonferroni correction. EpiData software was used for data entry and error detection. SPSS v.12.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis. 2.6 Patient and public involvement Patients were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of our research. 3. Results As shown in the flowchart (Fig. 1), we enrolled 2900 participants at baseline, data from 2462 (85.1%) participants were ultimately entered into our data analyses. The age distribution ranged from 20 to 46 years, with a mean age of 32.4 years (±3.8 years). Overall, 1274 participants (51.7%) had vaginal deliveries (VDs), 692 (28.1%) women had cesarean section (CS) deliveries (not in labor), 236 women (9.6%) had CS deliveries (in labor), and 260 (10.6%) women had forceps deliveries (FDs). A total of 525 (21.3%) women had delivery histories. Table 1 shows the sociodemographic characteristics of the participants. 3.1. Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms The frequencies of individual LUTS are shown in Table 2. The prevalence of any LUTS was 70.6% and varied with different delivery modes ( P< 0.001 ). Storage symptoms were more prevalent than voiding symptoms (65.4% vs . 23.0%). Storage LUTS were more prevalent in women with VDs and FDs than in those with CS deliveries (70.3% with VDs, 73.5% with FDs, 53.4% with CS deliveries who were in labor and 57.4% with CS deliveries who were not in labor). Nocturia was the most common symptom (35.4%) and varied with different delivery modes ( P< 0.001, 34.8% with VDs, 46.5% with FDs, 38.1% with CS deliveries who were in labor and 31.5% with CS deliveries who were not in labor), followed by frequency (25.6%). However, there was no significant difference in frequency between those with VDs and CS deliveries. Urgency (25.3%) and SUI (20.8%) were also prevalent and varied with different delivery modes ( P< 0.001) . Straining was the least common symptom (6.1%) and varied with different delivery modes ( P=0.01) (Table 2). Women who had VD or FD histories were more susceptible to different storage LUTS, such as frequency ( P=0.0019 ) and UI ( P < 0.001 ), than those with a CS history (Table 2; Fig. 2). However, the difference in voiding symptoms was not notable. Young patients were at high risk for voiding symptoms such as pain/burning ( P=0.003 ), while SUI was most common in women between the ages of 30 and 39 years (22.4%). 3.2. Symptom-specific bother due to lower urinary tract symptoms The extent to which the study participants were bothered by each urinary symptom is summarized in Table 3 and Fig. 3. Only 6.0–20.2% of participants with bothersome LUTS reported a moderate to severe impact on their quality of life; 1.3–15.6% reported severe bother. Some of the most prevalent symptoms were also reported as the most bothersome, such as UUI (87.3%) and SUI (85.5%). Some of the symptoms that were most likely to be rated as bothersome were not necessarily the most likely to cause moderate or severe bother, such as pain/burning (81.8% vs. 10.7%). UUI was the most likely symptom to cause severe (15.6%) or moderate to severe bother (18.1%), followed by SUI (15.3% and 15.5%, respectively). Nocturia was less likely to be bothersome but the most likely to cause moderate to severe bother (38.0% and 20.2%). Frequency, which caused more moderate or severe bother (21.5% and 17.6%), was the storage symptom that was least commonly reported to be bothersome. Voiding symptoms were less likely to cause moderate or severe bother than storage symptoms. Straining was the most frequent symptom that caused bother (83.3%). Straining and intermittency were more likely to cause moderate or severe bother (16.0% and 13.8%, respectively) (Table 3, Fig.3). 3.3. Potential risk factors for lower urinary tract symptoms The risk factors for LUTS according to logistic regression analysis are shown in Tables 4–6 (a-d). VDs and FDs increased the odds of every kind of LUTS. Women who had VDs and FDs were more susceptible to any LUTS and bothersome LUTS than those who had CS deliveries, especially any bothersome LUTS (2.11-fold (95% CI: 1.69-2.63), 2.55-fold (95% CI: 1.86-3.50)), moderate to severely bothersome LUTS (3.17-fold (95% CI: 2.03-4.92), 4.14-fold (95% CI: 2.42-7.07)), any severely bothersome LUTS (4.80-fold (95% CI: 2.22-10.39), 6.65-fold (95% CI: 2.76-16.03)), storage symptoms (1.84- fold (95% CI: 1.48-2.29), 2.18-fold (95% CI: 1.55-3.06)), any UI (2.79-fold (95% CI: 2.16-3.60), 2.89-fold (95% CI: 2.04-4.09)), urgency (1.70-fold (95% CI: 1.32-2.19), 1.76-fold (95% CI: 1.24-2.50)), UUI (3.80-fold (95% CI: 2.54-5.71), 5.10-fold (95% CI: 3.11-8.36)), SUI (2.84-fold (95% CI: 2.13-3.80), 2.68-fold (95% CI: 1.81-3.97)) and MUI (4.00-fold (95% CI: 2.43-6.62), 4.78-fold (95% CI: 2.59-8.83)). A history of VD (VD or FD history) was a strong predictor for both moderate to severely bothersome LUTS and any severely bothersome LUTS and UI ( P ≤ 0.05). Participants with a perineal laceration had increased odds of any bothersome LUTS (1.90-fold (95% CI: 1.21-2.98)) and any SUI (2.27-fold (95% CI: 1.33-3.86)) ( P ≤ 0.05). Voiding symptoms were less influenced by delivery mode and delivery histories. 3.4 Pelvic floor muscle function A significant relationship between different delivery modes and PFM values was found ( P < 0.001 ). The CS (not in labor) group had significantly better sEMG parameters than the VD group in terms of the total score ( P < 0.001 ), pretest average mean amplitude ( P<0.001 ), flick contraction average peak amplitude ( P < 0.001 ), flick contraction time after peak ( P<0.001 ), tonic contraction average mean amplitude (CS vs . VD, P < 0 .001 ; CS vs. FD, P =0.002), tonic contraction mean amplitude variability ( P < 0.001) and posttesting average mean amplitude ( P < 0.001). Women who underwent CS deliveries in labor also showed superior pelvic floor muscle function compared to women who experienced VDs based on the total score ( P < 0.001), pretest average mean amplitude ( P < 0.001), flash contraction average peak amplitude ( P < 0.001), tonic contractions average mean amplitude ( P < 0.001), tonic contractions mean amplitude variability (CS vs . VD, P =0.006; CS vs . FD, P =0.002), and posttesting average mean amplitude ( P < 0.001). FDs had a more negative impact on PFMs than VDs. The amplitudes of flick and tonic contractions on sEMG were 29.3 (14.2) and 19.1 (10.1), respectively, in the FD group, in which the results showed the significantly lowest amplitude compared with the other groups ( P < 0.001). There were also significant differences in the total score ( P =0.001) between the VD and FD groups. Whether a woman was in labor before undergoing CS had no obvious effect on the total score, flash contraction average peak amplitude or posttesting average mean amplitude. In total, 503 women had a delivery history. The total sEMG scores were significantly different among the different groups ( P =0.038). Women with a VD history had significantly lower flick contraction average peak amplitude ( P =0.015) and pretest and posttest average mean amplitudes ( P =0.001 and P =0.009) than women with a CS delivery history (Table 7). We did not find any significant differences between women with or without lateral episiotomies or perineal lacerations. 4. Discussion We reported a higher prevalence in the participants than in adult women in our previous population-based study 13 . All of the individual LUTS caused bother, and storage symptoms were more likely than voiding symptoms to cause moderate or severe bother, which is consistent with our previous research. A broader view of LUTS showed that potential risk factors include age, race, micturition habits, lifestyle factors, and especially delivery histories 13,17 . Childbirth damages pelvic floor function and has different effects on the occurrence of LUTS, which was also confirmed in our results. Overweight, obese and weight gain during pregnancy may contribute to increased LUTS during and after pregnancy 18,19 , but scientific support is lacking. One study reported that weight gain during pregnancy does not seem to be related to LUTS 20 , we obtained a similar result. Only a few studies about pelvic floor function in the early postpartum period according to different modes of delivery have been presented 21 . Stretching injury of the PFMs, innervating nerves and connective tissue caused by VDs may play important roles in pelvic floor pathologies. VDs, especially instrumental VDs, were the most important factor for changes in PFM variables. In our study, compared with CS deliveries, in VDs, especially FDs, lower sEMG activity were observed. The resting baseline sEMG reflects the resting activity of the PFMs without any voluntary contractions, which is crucial for maintaining the proper postpartum anatomical position of the pelvic organs. A lower resting baseline sEMG might represent lower muscle tone, making women more prone to vaginal laxity and UI. Although some studies reported no significant differences in baseline activity values between pregnant and nulliparous women 22 , we confirmed that different modes of delivery affected the pretest and posttest resting baseline sEMG findings. There was a higher resting baseline sEMG after CS deliveries and a lower resting baseline sEMG after FDs in the postpartum period at 6 weeks, which was consistent with other studies 21 . PFM contractility was also significantly lower in the VD group, especially in the FD group. Our study also showed that in women with VDs, the contractile abilities (flick, tonic) of the PFMs were dramatically decreased. However, Colla et al. found that the strength of PFM contractions seemed to recover spontaneously between 1 and 3 months after delivery 23 . In these studies, the CS group had a higher BMI and older age than the VD group, and these factors could have influenced the results. For women in the VD group, the contractility, contraction speed and stability of the PFMs were significantly higher than those of women in the FD group. However, a previous study did not show significant differences in strength reduction between spontaneous and instrumental deliveries. The instrumental deliveries group in that study consisted only of women with vacuum-assisted deliveries. Vacuum deliveries have been found to be less traumatic for the pelvic floor musculature than forceps deliveries, which could be one reason for these results 24 . Previous evidence indicated that parity, especially the number of VDs, was associated with damage to the pelvic floor 25 . The present study showed that the total sEMG scores were significantly different among the different delivery history groups. We found that compared with women with a history of CS delivery, women with a history of VD delivery had lower contractile abilities (flick) and resting baseline sEMG. A prospective cohort study of parous women estimated the change in PFM strength over time and found that women who delivered all their children by CS had stronger PFMs than those with at least 1 vaginal nonforceps birth or women with at least 1 vaginal FD. Interestingly, the forceps group also showed the greatest improvement in strength over time 26 . Although a previous study found no significant differences in PFM strength between women with or without episiotomy 27 . Our study showed higher total sEMS scores and more stable tonic contractions in women without episiotomy. Bladder health in women and girls is poorly understood. It is known that 6weeks after delivery is a very important time for women to recover. Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and associated conditions comprise a variety of bothersome bladder complaints and should be consideration for medical intervention. Pelvic floor muscular tears across pregnancies, as well as the number of childbirth episodes and associated interventions, may contribute to an accumulated risk for LUTS and poorer bladder health. Women with a VD history had increased odds of storage and bothersome LUTS. VDs, especially FDs, may cause injury to the pelvic muscles, nerves, and connective tissue of the pelvic floor and have a negative impact on bladder control, especially the function of the storage period. Although SEMG records the electrical activity produced by the recruitment of motor units and not muscle strength itself, some studies indicate that there is good correlation between the number of activated motor units and muscle strength 28 . Pregnancy may contribute to reduced PFM strength and endurance 29 ,because of compression, stretching or tearing of the nerves, muscles and connective tissue. In general, muscle contractions increase as the number of activated motor units increases; thus, electrical activity is proportional to the level of strength developed by the muscles, and its changes are considered to represent PFM contractions and relaxations 21,22 . Although we did not find a direct relationship between LUTS and the decline in pelvic floor function, the increased prevalence of LUTS, especially storage symptoms, is closely associated with VDs, especially FDs. The decline in pelvic floor muscle function is also related to VDs or FDs. We speculate that the changes in bladder function during the storage period are related to the changes in postpartum pelvic floor muscle function. Further research is needed to prove this hypothesis and determine whether pelvic floor muscle function training and pelvic floor electrical stimulation can improve LUTS symptoms. The strengths of our study are the large sample size and the use of a professional questionnaire for urinary symptoms based strictly on criteria in the 2002 ICS guidelines, which also enabled comparisons with the results of other studies. Our study had some limitations. Our questionnaire did not assess all LUTS, and the observational design is a poor way to ascertain risk factors. Longitudinal studies are needed to better understand the temporal nature and associations of risk factors. The surface EMG results could not directly reflect muscle strength, structure, or anatomical position. Further studies are needed. 5. Conclusions This was an observational study of LUTS in women with different modes of delivery after 6 weeks. Of the 70.6% of women who experienced LUTS, nocturia, frequency, urgency, and SUI were the most prevalent symptoms. Straining and UI were most frequently reported as bothersome, while UI caused severe discomfort. Nocturia, frequency, UUI and straining cause more moderate and severe discomfort. The likelihood of any, individual, and bothersome LUTS may involve multiple factors, and VDs, especially FDs, are the strongest predictors, especially for storage symptoms. The reason may be that VDs and FDs are more likely to cause PFM or nerve damage. Lower sEMG activity, including resting baseline and contraction amplitudes, was observed in women with VDs, especially FDs. Further research is needed to determine whether the changes in bladder function during the storage period are related to the changes in postpartum pelvic floor function. Abbreviations LUTS: Lower urinary tract symptoms UI: Urinary incontinence SUI: Stress urinary incontinence VD: Vaginal delivery FD: Forceps delivery CS: Cesarean section sEMG: Surface electromyography Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate ： The study was approved by the Peking University First Hospital's Ethics Committee (approval number 2022-285-002), approval was obtained from all study participants and the study followed the code of ethics of the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Availability of data and materials: The datasets analyzed in current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interests: All of the authors report no conflicts of interest. Funding: The Seed fund of Peking University First Hospital (no. 3053750) Authors' contributions: Lei Zhang: Study design, data collection, paper writing, data statistics: Xiaoxiao Wang: Data collection, paper writing, data statistics; Xinnan Hou: Data collection; Xinrong Zhuang: Data collection, data entry; Yu Wang: Data collection; Xiaoqing Wang: Data collection, paper writing; Ye Lu: Study design, paper editing and supervision. Acknowledgements: This study received financial support from the Seed fund of Peking University First Hospital (no. 3053750) and approval from the Bristol Urological Institute in England for use of their Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (BFLUTS) questionnaires. References Irwin DE, Kopp ZS, Agatep B, Milsom I, Abrams P. Worldwide prevalence estimates of lower urinary tract symptoms, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence and bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int. 2011;108:1132-1138. Hunskaar S, Lose G, Sykes D, Voss S. The prevalence of urinary incontinence in women in four European countries. BJU Int. 2004;93:324-30. Minassian VA, Yan X, Lichtenfeld MJ, Sun H, Stewart WF. The iceberg of health care utilization in women with urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1087-93. Boyle R, Hay-Smith EJ, Cody JD, Morkved S. Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and fecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women: A short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33: 269–276. Soave I, Scarani S, Mallozzi M, Nobili F, Marci R, Caserta D. Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary incontinence during pregnancy and after childbirth and its effect on urinary system and supportive structures assessed by objective measurement techniques. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;299:609-623. Woodley SJ, Lawrenson P, Boyle R, et al. Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;5:CD007471. Sampselle CM, Newman DK, Miller JM, et al. A randomized controlled trial to compare 2 scalable interventions for lower urinary tract symptom prevention: Main outcomes of the TULIP study. J Urol. 2017;197:1480-1486. Handa VL, Blomquist JL, Knoepp LR, Hoskey KA, McDermott KC, Munoz A. Pelvic floor disorders 5-10 years after vaginal or cesarean childbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:777-784. Shek KL, Dietz HP. Intrapartum risk factors for levator trauma. Bjog. 2010;117:1485-1492. Miller JM, Low LK, Zielinski R, Smith AR, DeLancey JO, Brandon C. Evaluating maternal recovery from labor and delivery: bone and levator ani injuries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:188.e181-188.e111. Laterza RM, Schrutka L, Umek W, Albrich S, Koelbl H. Pelvic floor dysfunction after levator trauma 1-year postpartum: a prospective case-control study. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:41-47. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 736: Optimizing Postpartum Care. Obstet Gynecol.2018; 131:e140. Reaffirmed 2021. Zhang L, Zhu L, Xu T, et al. A Population-based Survey of the Prevalence, Potential Risk Factors, and Symptom-specific Bother of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Adult Chinese Women. Eur Urol. 2015;68:97-112. Huang L, Zhang SW, Wu SL, Ma L, Deng XH. The Chinese version of ICIQ: a useful tool in clinical practice and research on urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27:522-524. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21:167-178. 16. Glazer HI, Romanzi L, Polaneczky M. Pelvic floor muscle surface electromyography. Reliability and clinical predictive validity. J Reprod Med. 1999;44:779-82. Low LK, Zielinski R, Tao Y, Galecki A, Brandon CJ, Miller JM. Predicting Birth-Related Levator Ani Tear Severity in Primiparous Women: Evaluating Maternal Recovery from Labor and Delivery (EMRLD Study). Open J Obstet Gynecol.2014;4:266-278. Breyer BN, Creasman JM, Richter HE, et al. A Behavioral Weight Loss Program and Nonurinary Incontinence Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Overweight and Obese Women with Urinary Incontinence: A Secondary Data Analysis of PRIDE. J Urol. 2018;199:215-222. Subak LL, Wing R, West DS, et al. Weight loss to treat urinary incontinence in overweight and obese women. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:481-490. Wesnes SL, Hunskaar S, Bo K, Rortveit G. Urinary incontinence and weight change during pregnancy and postpartum: a cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172:1034-44. Guo KM, He LC, Feng Y, Huang L, Morse AN, Liu HS. Surface electromyography of the pelvic floor at 6-8 weeks following delivery: a comparison of different modes of delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:1511-1520. Resende AP, Petricelli CD, Bernardes BT, Alexandre SM, Nakamura MU, Zanetti MR. Electromyographic evaluation of pelvic floor muscles in pregnant and nonpregnant women. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1041-5. Colla C, Paiva LL, Ferla L, et al. Pelvic floor dysfunction in the immediate puerperium, and 1 and 3 months after vaginal or cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143:94-100. Sigurdardottir T, Steingrimsdottir T, Arnason A, Bø K. Pelvic floor muscle function before and after first childbirth. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:1497-503. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Wein A, Khoury S. Incontinence: 4th International Consultation on Incontinence. Paris: Health Publications; 2009. Myer ENB, Roem JL, Lovejoy DA, Abernethy MG, Blomquist JL, Handa VL. Longitudinal changes in pelvic floor muscle strength among parous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol.2018;219:482.e1-482.e7. Bø K, Hilde G, Tennfjord MK, Engh ME. Does episiotomy influence vaginal resting pressure, pelvic floor muscle strength and endurance, and prevalence of urinary incontinence 6 weeks postpartum? Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36:683-686. Madill SJ, Harvey MA, McLean L. Women with stress urinary incontinence demonstrate motor control differences during coughing. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2010;20:804-12. Morkved S, Salvesen KA, Bo K, Eik-Nes S. Pelvic floor musclestrength and thickness in continent and incontinent nulliparouspregnant women. Int Urogynecol J. 2004;15:384-9; discussion 390. Tables Tables 1 to 7 are available in the Supplementary Files section Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Tables.doc otherTables.doc Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4364318","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":299522275,"identity":"63848de6-08d6-4def-90e1-55cdcce043e8","order_by":0,"name":"lei zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"lei","middleName":"","lastName":"zhang","suffix":""},{"id":299522278,"identity":"cb5de493-6f6f-4805-a914-ae0fbd3a837e","order_by":1,"name":"Xiaoxiao Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xiaoxiao","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":299522281,"identity":"f9a358d5-5b5b-4d18-8e4d-ec2d72579762","order_by":2,"name":"Xinnan Hou","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xinnan","middleName":"","lastName":"Hou","suffix":""},{"id":299522284,"identity":"c3217aa5-ea0b-4869-b726-a142efe07e22","order_by":3,"name":"Xinrong Zhuang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical College","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xinrong","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhuang","suffix":""},{"id":299522286,"identity":"0ac3bfea-c136-4741-b0fd-b36c587873f6","order_by":4,"name":"Yu Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yu","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":299522288,"identity":"a971a73c-1b20-49ad-ae6d-bc1666f63ff8","order_by":5,"name":"Xiaoqing Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xiaoqing","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":299522290,"identity":"6277a062-47f4-42c0-957c-46e48d1583d3","order_by":6,"name":"Ye Lu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University First Hospital","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ye","middleName":"","lastName":"Lu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-05-03 13:14:30","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":56550174,"identity":"a1adfb2d-fafa-4f23-a2a9-2553c3742d35","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-15 15:49:42","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":259549,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStudy flowchart\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/86eb519ac79ebe3cf1a7f41b.jpg"},{"id":56548461,"identity":"3965eb55-1eb4-4e37-98f8-7dda4ebbc4a8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-15 15:41:42","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":291647,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(a) The prevalence of different kind of LUTS between different delivery modes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(b) The prevalence of different kind of LUTS between different delivery histories\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/4557b836f1b021baf2ef4a12.png"},{"id":56548463,"identity":"d47224f1-9ed0-49ca-8a42-a68ef3c359cb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-15 15:41:43","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":47796,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSymptom-specific bother and extent of individual LUTS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThe bother associated with each symptom was evaluated using a scale ranging from 0 (not bothered at all) to 10 (greatly bothered). Bother was also defined by dividing the Likert responses into three groups: (a) ‘minor’ with a scale ranging from 1-4; (b) ‘moderate’ ranging from 5-7; and (c) ‘severe’ ranging from 8-10.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/5bdebfbe2fe322857061b30e.jpg"},{"id":69069372,"identity":"13556e0c-745a-485d-babc-be9b118aa2c6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-11-15 09:39:07","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":828409,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/64de95e6-64bc-4f86-a30a-151093844140.pdf"},{"id":56548464,"identity":"bb81871d-7450-41ed-8376-8c904ff8ca2d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-15 15:41:43","extension":"doc","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":207872,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Tables.doc","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/36768098b82d08283268de2a.doc"},{"id":56548460,"identity":"4e47c94b-ba9f-461f-843f-e0d3229a608f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-15 15:41:42","extension":"doc","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":533504,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"otherTables.doc","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4364318/v1/d6f1d514e41e8e6ebbda619c.doc"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms 6 weeks after delivery and the relationship of pelvic floor muscle function","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eLower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) have attracted substantial attention in recent years, partly due to their high prevalence but primarily because of the heightened awareness of their detrimental impact on health-related quality of life \u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e. While LUTS are common in women and have a negative impact on quality of life, most women do not seek treatment \u003csup\u003e2,3\u003c/sup\u003e. While numerous effective treatment options for LUTS exist, there is sparse evidence informing optimal bladder health promotion and LUTS prevention strategies. Most primary prevention trials focus purely on one particular symptom. Evidence supports the use of pelvic floor exercise programs for the prevention of urinary incontinence (UI) during pregnancy, but outcomes for other LUTS, such as voiding dysfunction or pain, are unknown \u003csup\u003e4\u0026ndash;7\u003c/sup\u003e. Pregnancy and vaginal birth are known risk factors for UI secondary to pelvic floor musculature and nerve injury \u003csup\u003e8\u0026ndash;11\u003c/sup\u003e. The postpartum period is a time in which women recover and take on new roles. Some traditional practices are observed to ensure recovery and prevent ill health in later years \u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e. UI can be prevented and promoted at this important time. However, there are few data on LUTS in these women. By examining the effects of labor management practices on urological outcomes across this important time, researchers will be well positioned to inform policies and practices governing maternity care.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study was to provide estimates of the prevalence and potential risk factors for LUTS and the burden they impose on women with different modes of delivery after afte 6 weeks and the relationship between pelvic floor function and different kinds of LUTS.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Study design and participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeginning in January 2019, we collected data from women who had postpartum reviews at 6 weeks after delivery in outpatient clinics at Peking University First Hospital. The eligibility criteria stipulated postpartum women without urinary incontinence before pregnancy. We excluded women who: (a) were medically diagnosed with cognitive impairments and who could not understand the questions,(b) had parity\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;3,(c) with multiple pregnancy,(d) combined with pelvic organ prolapse(Stage 2 or higher),(e) with history of anti-incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery or urinary surgery history;(f) with malignant tumor,(g) with urinary tract infection,(h) do not want to participate. Questionnaires were used to investigate these women. They also underwent a gynecological examination and pelvic floor muscle screening (PFM screening). Ethics committee approval and oral consent were obtained. The participants were asked to complete this questionnaire every year after delivery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe calculated the sample size according to our previous national study \u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e. We aimed to survey at least 3 different delivery modes. A minimal sample size was calculated to detect a 55.5% prevalence of LUTS, with a 5% estimated error and a 95% confidence interval (CI). Considering a 20% refusal rate, a total of 1367 participants would be required for the LUTS reanalysis according to this formula:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Z\u003csub\u003eα/2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026times; (π \u0026times; (1\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;π)) / δ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026times;\u0026thinsp;3 \u0026times; (1\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20%)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.96\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026times; (55.5% \u0026times; (1\u0026ndash;55.5%)) / 0.05 \u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026times; 3\u0026times; (1\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20%)\u0026thinsp;\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;1367.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Measurements\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe used a Chinese version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire\u0026ndash;Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-FLUTS)\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e. This questionnaire included an assessment of 10 types of LUTS: nocturia, daytime frequency, urgency, UUI, SUI, other incontinence, pain or burning, hesitancy, straining, and intermittency. Participants were asked to rate how often individual LUTS were experienced and, if LUTS were experienced, to what degree the symptoms were bothersome. The prevalence of other LUTS was defined by answers other than \u003cem\u003eno\u003c/em\u003e. The bother associated with each symptom was evaluated using a scale ranging from 0 (not bothered at all) to 10 (greatly bothered). Bother was also defined by dividing the Likert responses into three groups: \u003cem\u003eminor\u003c/em\u003e (scores of 1\u0026ndash;4), \u003cem\u003emoderate\u003c/em\u003e (scores of 5\u0026ndash;7), and \u003cem\u003esevere\u003c/em\u003e (scores of 8\u0026ndash;10). Information on sociodemographic background, reproductive factors, defecation, and medical conditions was also collected in detail.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Diagnostic criteria\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe definitions in this study were consistent with the standards recommended by the 2002 International Continence Society (ICS) guidelines\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e. In our study, nocturia was defined as two or more micturitions per night. Daytime frequency was defined as voiding eight times or more per day. Those who reported UI without symptoms of UUI or SUI were categorized as having other UI. Cesarean section performed after cervical dilation\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;1cm were categorized as CS in labor, otherwise, it is defined as CS not in labor.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Pelvic floor muscle screening (PFM screening)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll participants underwent a gynecological physical examination and PFM screening. The bioelectrical activity of the PFMs was recorded using equipment (Nanjing Medlander Company, China) following the Glazer protocols \u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e. The patient was placed in the supine position, and the hips and knees were gently flexed. Two monitoring electrodes were placed on the iliac region, and the other two electrodes were placed on the two sides of the hypogastric region. After the vaginal electrode was placed, participants were asked to perform a series of contraction and relaxation actions according to voice commands. The following surface electromyography (sEMG) signal parameters were recorded: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) one 60-s rest time (prebaseline): the average mean amplitude (\u0026micro;V) and mean amplitude variability (%); (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) five 2-s phasic (flick) contractions with a 2-s rest time: the average peak amplitude (\u0026micro;V), time before peak (s) and time after peak (s); (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) five 10-s tonic contractions, with a 10-s rest between each: the average mean amplitude (\u0026micro;V) and mean amplitude variability (%); and (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) one 60-s rest time (postbaseline): the average mean amplitude (\u0026micro;V) and mean amplitude variability (%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe performed χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e tests to compare the prevalence differences between the groups. A multivariable model was set up to assess bother and individual LUTS-related potential risk factors and to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs; this model was adapted for all factors in the final version. A two-sided \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e value\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05 was considered statistically significant. One-way ANOVA was used with Bonferroni correction. EpiData software was used for data entry and error detection. SPSS v.12.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.6 Patient and public involvement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePatients were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of our research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;As shown in the flowchart (Fig. 1), we enrolled 2900 participants at baseline, data from 2462 (85.1%) participants were ultimately entered into our data analyses. The age distribution ranged from 20 to 46 years, with a mean age of 32.4 years (±3.8 years). Overall, 1274 participants (51.7%) had vaginal deliveries (VDs), 692 (28.1%) women had cesarean section (CS) deliveries (not in labor), 236 women (9.6%) had CS deliveries (in labor),\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;260 (10.6%) women had forceps deliveries (FDs).\u0026nbsp;A total of\u0026nbsp;525 (21.3%) women had delivery histories.\u0026nbsp;Table 1 shows the sociodemographic characteristics of the participants.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e3.1. Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe frequencies of individual LUTS are shown in Table 2. The prevalence of any LUTS was 70.6% and varied with different delivery modes (\u003cem\u003eP\u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e). Storage symptoms were more prevalent than voiding symptoms (65.4% \u003cem\u003evs\u003c/em\u003e. 23.0%). Storage\u0026nbsp;LUTS\u0026nbsp;were more prevalent in women with VDs and FDs than\u0026nbsp;in those with\u0026nbsp;CS deliveries (70.3% with VDs, 73.5% with FDs, 53.4% with CS deliveries who were in labor and 57.4% with CS deliveries who were not in labor). Nocturia was the most common symptom (35.4%) and varied with different delivery modes (\u003cem\u003eP\u0026lt; 0.001,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e34.8% with VDs, 46.5% with FDs, 38.1% with CS deliveries who were in labor and 31.5% with CS deliveries who were not in labor), followed by frequency (25.6%).\u0026nbsp;However, there was no significant difference\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;frequency between those with VDs and CS deliveries. Urgency (25.3%) and SUI (20.8%) were also prevalent and varied with different delivery modes (\u003cem\u003eP\u0026lt; 0.001)\u003c/em\u003e. Straining was the least common symptom (6.1%) and varied with different delivery modes (\u003cem\u003eP=0.01)\u003c/em\u003e (Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWomen\u0026nbsp;who\u0026nbsp;had VD or FD histories were more susceptible to different storage LUTS, such as frequency (\u003cem\u003eP=0.0019\u003c/em\u003e) and UI (\u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e),\u0026nbsp;than those with a CS history\u0026nbsp;(Table 2; Fig. 2). However, the difference\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;voiding\u0026nbsp;symptoms was not\u0026nbsp;notable. Young patients\u0026nbsp;were\u0026nbsp;at high risk for voiding symptoms such as pain/burning (\u003cem\u003eP=0.003\u003c/em\u003e), while SUI\u0026nbsp;was\u0026nbsp;most common in women between the ages of 30 and 39\u0026nbsp;years\u0026nbsp;(22.4%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e3.2. Symptom-specific bother due to lower urinary tract symptoms\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe extent to which the study participants were bothered by each urinary symptom is summarized in Table 3 and Fig. 3. Only 6.0–20.2% of participants with bothersome LUTS reported a moderate to severe impact on their quality of life; 1.3–15.6% reported severe bother. Some of the most prevalent symptoms were also reported as the most bothersome, such as UUI (87.3%) and SUI (85.5%). Some of the symptoms that were most likely to be rated as bothersome were not necessarily the most likely to cause moderate or severe bother, such as pain/burning (81.8% \u003cem\u003evs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e10.7%). UUI was the most likely symptom to cause severe (15.6%) or moderate to severe bother (18.1%), followed by SUI (15.3% and 15.5%, respectively). Nocturia was less likely to be bothersome but the most likely to cause moderate to severe bother (38.0% and 20.2%). Frequency, which\u0026nbsp;caused\u0026nbsp;more moderate or severe bother (21.5% and 17.6%), was the storage symptom that was least commonly reported to be bothersome.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVoiding symptoms were less likely to cause moderate or severe bother than storage symptoms. Straining was the most frequent symptom that caused bother (83.3%).\u0026nbsp;Straining and intermittency were more likely to cause moderate or severe bother (16.0% and 13.8%, respectively) (Table 3, Fig.3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e3.3. Potential risk factors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003efor\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;lower urinary tract symptoms\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe risk\u0026nbsp;factors\u0026nbsp;for\u0026nbsp;LUTS according to logistic regression analysis are shown in\u0026nbsp;Tables\u0026nbsp;4–6 (a-d). VDs and FDs increased the odds of every kind of LUTS. Women\u0026nbsp;who\u0026nbsp;had VDs and FDs were more susceptible to any LUTS and bothersome LUTS than those who had CS deliveries, especially any bothersome LUTS (2.11-fold (95% CI: 1.69-2.63), 2.55-fold (95% CI: 1.86-3.50)), moderate to severely bothersome LUTS (3.17-fold (95% CI: 2.03-4.92), 4.14-fold (95% CI: 2.42-7.07)), any severely bothersome LUTS (4.80-fold (95% CI: 2.22-10.39), 6.65-fold (95% CI: 2.76-16.03)), storage symptoms (1.84- fold (95% CI: 1.48-2.29), 2.18-fold (95% CI: 1.55-3.06)),\u0026nbsp;any\u0026nbsp;UI (2.79-fold (95% CI: 2.16-3.60), 2.89-fold (95% CI: 2.04-4.09)), urgency (1.70-fold (95% CI: 1.32-2.19), 1.76-fold (95% CI: 1.24-2.50)), UUI (3.80-fold (95% CI: 2.54-5.71), 5.10-fold (95% CI: 3.11-8.36)), SUI (2.84-fold (95% CI: 2.13-3.80), 2.68-fold (95% CI: 1.81-3.97)) and MUI (4.00-fold (95% CI: 2.43-6.62), 4.78-fold (95% CI: 2.59-8.83)). A history of VD (VD or FD history) was a strong predictor for\u0026nbsp;both\u0026nbsp;moderate to severely bothersome LUTS\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;any severely bothersome LUTS and UI (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e ≤ 0.05). Participants with a\u0026nbsp;\u003ca href=\"javascript%3Avoid(0);\"\u003eperineal\u003c/a\u003e \u003ca href=\"javascript%3Avoid(0);\"\u003elaceration\u003c/a\u003e had increased\u0026nbsp;odds of any bothersome LUTS (1.90-fold (95% CI:\u0026nbsp;1.21-2.98)) and any SUI (2.27-fold (95% CI:\u0026nbsp;1.33-3.86))\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e ≤ 0.05). Voiding symptoms were less influenced by delivery mode and delivery histories.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.4\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Pelvic floor muscle function\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA significant relationship between different delivery modes and PFM values was found (\u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e).\u0026nbsp;The\u0026nbsp;CS\u0026nbsp;(not in labor) group\u0026nbsp;had significantly\u0026nbsp;better sEMG parameters than\u0026nbsp;the\u0026nbsp;VD group in\u0026nbsp;terms\u0026nbsp;of the total score\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e), pretest average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u0026lt;0.001\u003c/em\u003e), flick contraction average peak amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e), flick\u0026nbsp;contraction\u0026nbsp;time after peak\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u0026lt;0.001\u003c/em\u003e), tonic\u0026nbsp;contraction\u0026nbsp;average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(CS \u003cem\u003evs\u003c/em\u003e. VD,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;P \u0026lt; 0\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e.001\u003c/em\u003e;\u0026nbsp;CS \u003cem\u003evs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eFD, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.002),\u0026nbsp;tonic\u0026nbsp;contraction\u0026nbsp;mean amplitude variability\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001)\u0026nbsp;and posttesting average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001).\u0026nbsp;Women\u0026nbsp;who\u0026nbsp;underwent CS deliveries in labor also showed superior pelvic floor muscle function compared to women\u0026nbsp;who\u0026nbsp;experienced VDs based on\u0026nbsp;the total\u0026nbsp;score\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), pretest average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), flash contraction\u0026nbsp;average peak amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), tonic contractions average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), tonic contractions mean amplitude variability\u0026nbsp;(CS \u003cem\u003evs\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp;VD,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.006; CS \u003cem\u003evs\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp;FD,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.002),\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;posttesting average mean amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). FDs had\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;more negative impact on PFMs than VDs.\u0026nbsp;The\u0026nbsp;amplitudes\u0026nbsp;of flick and tonic contractions on sEMG were 29.3\u0026nbsp;(14.2) and 19.1\u0026nbsp;(10.1), respectively, in the FD group, in which the results showed the significantly lowest amplitude compared with the other groups (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001).\u0026nbsp;There\u0026nbsp;were\u0026nbsp;also significant\u0026nbsp;differences\u0026nbsp;in the total score\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.001) between\u0026nbsp;the\u0026nbsp;VD and FD\u0026nbsp;groups.\u0026nbsp;Whether a woman was in labor before\u0026nbsp;undergoing\u0026nbsp;CS had no obvious effect on the total score,\u0026nbsp;flash contraction\u0026nbsp;average peak amplitude\u0026nbsp;or\u0026nbsp;posttesting average mean\u0026nbsp;amplitude.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; In total,\u0026nbsp;503 women had a delivery\u0026nbsp;history. The total sEMG scores\u0026nbsp;were\u0026nbsp;significantly different\u0026nbsp;among\u0026nbsp;the\u0026nbsp;different groups\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.038).\u0026nbsp;Women with\u0026nbsp;a VD history had\u0026nbsp;significantly\u0026nbsp;lower flick\u0026nbsp;contraction\u0026nbsp;average peak amplitude\u0026nbsp;(\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.015) and pretest and posttest average mean amplitudes (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.001 and \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e=0.009) than women with a CS delivery history (Table 7). We did not find any significant differences between women with or without lateral episiotomies or perineal lacerations.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe reported a higher prevalence in the participants than in adult women in our previous population-based study \u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e. All of the individual LUTS caused bother, and storage symptoms were more likely than voiding symptoms to cause moderate or severe bother, which is consistent with our previous research. A broader view of LUTS showed that potential risk factors include age, race, micturition habits, lifestyle factors, and especially delivery histories\u003csup\u003e13,17\u003c/sup\u003e. Childbirth damages pelvic floor function and has different effects on the occurrence of LUTS, which was also confirmed in our results. Overweight, obese and weight gain during pregnancy may contribute to increased LUTS during and after pregnancy \u003csup\u003e18,19\u003c/sup\u003e, but scientific support is lacking. One study reported that weight gain during pregnancy does not seem to be related to LUTS \u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e, we obtained a similar result.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOnly a few studies about pelvic floor function in the early postpartum period according to different modes of delivery have been presented \u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. Stretching injury of the PFMs, innervating nerves and connective tissue caused by VDs may play important roles in pelvic floor pathologies. VDs, especially instrumental VDs, were the most important factor for changes in PFM variables. In our study, compared with CS deliveries, in VDs, especially FDs, lower sEMG activity were observed. The resting baseline sEMG reflects the resting activity of the PFMs without any voluntary contractions, which is crucial for maintaining the proper postpartum anatomical position of the pelvic organs. A lower resting baseline sEMG might represent lower muscle tone, making women more prone to vaginal laxity and UI. Although some studies reported no significant differences in baseline activity values between pregnant and nulliparous women \u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e, we confirmed that different modes of delivery affected the pretest and posttest resting baseline sEMG findings. There was a higher resting baseline sEMG after CS deliveries and a lower resting baseline sEMG after FDs in the postpartum period at 6 weeks, which was consistent with other studies \u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. PFM contractility was also significantly lower in the VD group, especially in the FD group. Our study also showed that in women with VDs, the contractile abilities (flick, tonic) of the PFMs were dramatically decreased. However, Colla et al. found that the strength of PFM contractions seemed to recover spontaneously between 1 and 3 months after delivery \u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e. In these studies, the CS group had a higher BMI and older age than the VD group, and these factors could have influenced the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor women in the VD group, the contractility, contraction speed and stability of the PFMs were significantly higher than those of women in the FD group. However, a previous study did not show significant differences in strength reduction between spontaneous and instrumental deliveries. The instrumental deliveries group in that study consisted only of women with vacuum-assisted deliveries. Vacuum deliveries have been found to be less traumatic for the pelvic floor musculature than forceps deliveries, which could be one reason for these results \u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrevious evidence indicated that parity, especially the number of VDs, was associated with damage to the pelvic floor \u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e. The present study showed that the total sEMG scores were significantly different among the different delivery history groups. We found that compared with women with a history of CS delivery, women with a history of VD delivery had lower contractile abilities (flick) and resting baseline sEMG. A prospective cohort study of parous women estimated the change in PFM strength over time and found that women who delivered all their children by CS had stronger PFMs than those with at least 1 vaginal nonforceps birth or women with at least 1 vaginal FD. Interestingly, the forceps group also showed the greatest improvement in strength over time \u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e. Although a previous study found no significant differences in PFM strength between women with or without episiotomy \u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e. Our study showed higher total sEMS scores and more stable tonic contractions in women without episiotomy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBladder health in women and girls is poorly understood. It is known that 6weeks after delivery is a very important time for women to recover. Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and associated conditions comprise a variety of bothersome bladder complaints and should be consideration for medical intervention. Pelvic floor muscular tears across pregnancies, as well as the number of childbirth episodes and associated interventions, may contribute to an accumulated risk for LUTS and poorer bladder health. Women with a VD history had increased odds of storage and bothersome LUTS. VDs, especially FDs, may cause injury to the pelvic muscles, nerves, and connective tissue of the pelvic floor and have a negative impact on bladder control, especially the function of the storage period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough SEMG records the electrical activity produced by the recruitment of motor units and not muscle strength itself, some studies indicate that there is good correlation between the number of activated motor units and muscle strength \u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e. Pregnancy may contribute to reduced PFM strength and endurance\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e,because of compression, stretching or tearing of the nerves, muscles and connective tissue. In general, muscle contractions increase as the number of activated motor units increases; thus, electrical activity is proportional to the level of strength developed by the muscles, and its changes are considered to represent PFM contractions and relaxations \u003csup\u003e21,22\u003c/sup\u003e. Although we did not find a direct relationship between LUTS and the decline in pelvic floor function, the increased prevalence of LUTS, especially storage symptoms, is closely associated with VDs, especially FDs. The decline in pelvic floor muscle function is also related to VDs or FDs. We speculate that the changes in bladder function during the storage period are related to the changes in postpartum pelvic floor muscle function. Further research is needed to prove this hypothesis and determine whether pelvic floor muscle function training and pelvic floor electrical stimulation can improve LUTS symptoms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e The strengths of our study are the large sample size and the use of a professional questionnaire for urinary symptoms based strictly on criteria in the 2002 ICS guidelines, which also enabled comparisons with the results of other studies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur study had some limitations. Our questionnaire did not assess all LUTS, and the observational design is a poor way to ascertain risk factors. Longitudinal studies are needed to better understand the temporal nature and associations of risk factors. The surface EMG results could not directly reflect muscle strength, structure, or anatomical position. Further studies are needed.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis was an observational study of LUTS in women with different modes of delivery after 6 weeks. Of the 70.6% of women who experienced LUTS, nocturia, frequency, urgency, and SUI were the most prevalent symptoms. Straining and UI were most frequently reported as bothersome, while UI caused severe discomfort. Nocturia, frequency, UUI and straining cause more moderate and severe discomfort. The likelihood of any, individual, and bothersome LUTS may involve multiple factors, and VDs, especially FDs, are the strongest predictors, especially for storage symptoms. The reason may be that VDs and FDs are more likely to cause PFM or nerve damage. Lower sEMG activity, including resting baseline and contraction amplitudes, was observed in women with VDs, especially FDs. Further research is needed to determine whether the changes in bladder function during the storage period are related to the changes in postpartum pelvic floor function.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eLUTS: Lower urinary tract symptoms\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUI: Urinary incontinence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSUI: Stress urinary incontinence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVD: Vaginal delivery\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFD: Forceps delivery\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCS: Cesarean section\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003esEMG: Surface electromyography\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e：\u003c/strong\u003eThe study was approved by the\u0026nbsp;Peking University First Hospital's Ethics Committee (approval number\u0026nbsp;2022-285-002), approval was obtained from all study participants and the study followed the code of ethics of the Declaration of Helsinki.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe datasets analyzed\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAll of the authors report no conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe Seed fund of Peking University First Hospital (no. 3053750)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors' contributions:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eLei Zhang: Study design, data collection, paper writing, data statistics: Xiaoxiao Wang: Data collection, paper writing, data statistics; Xinnan Hou: Data collection; Xinrong Zhuang: Data collection, data entry; Yu Wang: Data collection; Xiaoqing Wang: Data collection, paper writing; Ye Lu: Study design, paper editing and supervision.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements:\u003c/strong\u003e This study received financial support from the Seed fund of Peking University First Hospital (no. 3053750) and approval from the Bristol Urological Institute in England for use of their Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (BFLUTS) questionnaires.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIrwin DE, Kopp ZS, Agatep B, Milsom I, Abrams P. Worldwide prevalence estimates of lower urinary tract symptoms, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence and bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int. 2011;108:1132-1138.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHunskaar S, Lose G, Sykes D, Voss S. The prevalence of urinary incontinence in women in four European countries. BJU Int. 2004;93:324-30.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMinassian VA, Yan X, Lichtenfeld MJ, Sun H, Stewart WF. The iceberg of health care utilization in women with urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1087-93.\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBoyle R, Hay-Smith EJ, Cody JD, Morkved S. Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and fecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women: A short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33: 269\u0026ndash;276.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSoave I, Scarani S, Mallozzi M, Nobili F, Marci R, Caserta D. Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary incontinence during pregnancy and after childbirth and its effect on urinary system and supportive structures assessed by objective measurement techniques. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;299:609-623.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWoodley SJ, Lawrenson P, Boyle R, et al. Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;5:CD007471.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSampselle CM, Newman DK, Miller JM, et al. A randomized controlled trial to compare 2 scalable interventions for lower urinary tract symptom prevention: Main outcomes of the TULIP study. J Urol. 2017;197:1480-1486.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHanda VL, Blomquist JL, Knoepp LR, Hoskey KA, McDermott KC, Munoz A. Pelvic floor disorders 5-10 years after vaginal or cesarean childbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:777-784.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShek KL, Dietz HP. Intrapartum risk factors for levator trauma. Bjog. 2010;117:1485-1492.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMiller JM, Low LK, Zielinski R, Smith AR, DeLancey JO, Brandon C. Evaluating maternal recovery from labor and delivery: bone and levator ani injuries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:188.e181-188.e111.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLaterza RM, Schrutka L, Umek W, Albrich S, Koelbl H. Pelvic floor dysfunction after levator trauma 1-year postpartum: a prospective case-control study. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:41-47.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eACOG Committee Opinion No. 736: Optimizing Postpartum Care. Obstet Gynecol.2018; 131:e140. Reaffirmed 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhang L, Zhu L, Xu T, et al. A Population-based Survey of the Prevalence, Potential Risk Factors, and Symptom-specific Bother of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Adult Chinese Women. Eur Urol. 2015;68:97-112.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHuang L, Zhang SW, Wu SL, Ma L, Deng XH. The Chinese version of ICIQ: a useful tool in clinical practice and research on urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27:522-524.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAbrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21:167-178.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e16. Glazer HI, Romanzi L, Polaneczky M. Pelvic floor muscle surface electromyography. Reliability and clinical predictive validity. J Reprod Med. 1999;44:779-82.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLow LK, Zielinski R, Tao Y, Galecki A, Brandon CJ, Miller JM. Predicting Birth-Related Levator Ani Tear Severity in Primiparous Women: Evaluating Maternal Recovery from Labor and Delivery (EMRLD Study). Open J Obstet Gynecol.2014;4:266-278.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBreyer BN, Creasman JM, Richter HE, et al. A Behavioral Weight Loss Program and Nonurinary Incontinence Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Overweight and Obese Women with Urinary Incontinence: A Secondary Data Analysis of PRIDE. J Urol. 2018;199:215-222.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSubak LL, Wing R, West DS, et al. Weight loss to treat urinary incontinence in overweight and obese women. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:481-490.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWesnes SL, Hunskaar S, Bo K, Rortveit G. Urinary incontinence and weight change during pregnancy and postpartum: a cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172:1034-44.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGuo KM, He LC, Feng Y, Huang L, Morse AN, Liu HS. Surface electromyography of the pelvic floor at 6-8 weeks following delivery: a comparison of different modes of delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:1511-1520.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eResende AP, Petricelli CD, Bernardes BT, Alexandre SM, Nakamura MU, Zanetti MR. Electromyographic evaluation of pelvic floor muscles in pregnant and nonpregnant women. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1041-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eColla C, Paiva LL, Ferla L, et al. Pelvic floor dysfunction in the immediate puerperium, and 1 and 3 months after vaginal or cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143:94-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSigurdardottir T, Steingrimsdottir T, Arnason A, B\u0026oslash; K. Pelvic floor muscle function before and after first childbirth. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:1497-503.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAbrams P, Cardozo L, Wein A, Khoury S. Incontinence: 4th International Consultation on Incontinence. Paris: Health Publications; 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMyer ENB, Roem JL, Lovejoy DA, Abernethy MG, Blomquist JL, Handa VL. Longitudinal changes in pelvic floor muscle strength among parous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol.2018;219:482.e1-482.e7.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eB\u0026oslash; K, Hilde G, Tennfjord MK, Engh ME. Does episiotomy influence vaginal resting pressure, pelvic floor muscle strength and endurance, and prevalence of urinary incontinence 6 weeks postpartum? Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36:683-686.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMadill SJ, Harvey MA, McLean L. Women with stress urinary incontinence demonstrate motor control differences during coughing. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2010;20:804-12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMorkved S, Salvesen KA, Bo K, Eik-Nes S. Pelvic floor musclestrength and thickness in continent and incontinent nulliparouspregnant women. Int Urogynecol J. 2004;15:384-9; discussion 390.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003eTables 1 to 7 are available in the Supplementary Files section\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), Prevalence, Potential risk factors, Bother, Pelvic floor muscle function","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere are few studies of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in women with different modes of delivery after 42 days. It is doubtful whether the onset of LUTS is related to the decline of pelvic muscle function after delivery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis was an observational study conducted at Peking University First Hospital from 2019 to 2022. A total of 2462 women were recruited and interviewed 42 days after delivery using questionnaires, and gynecological physical examinations and pelvic floor muscle screening were performed. A modified Chinese Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms questionnaire was administered. The participants were asked about the presence of individual LUTS and rated the level of bother caused by those symptoms. Descriptive statistics, χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e tests, one-way ANOVA and multivariate logistic regressions were used for data analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe prevalence of any LUTS, storage symptoms, or voiding symptoms was 70.6%, 65.4%, and 23.0%, respectively. Nocturia was the most common symptom (35.4%), followed by frequency (25.6%), urgency (25.3%) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI; 20.8%). Nocturia and frequency were not frequently rated as bothersome (38.0%, 21.5%). Urinary incontinence (UI) was the most frequently reported as severely bothersome (SUI 15.6%, urge urinary incontinence (UUI) 15.3%). Vaginal delivery (VD) and forceps delivery (FD) were strong predictors of LUTS (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.05). Compared with cesarean section (CS), VD, especially FD, was associated with lower surface electromyography (sEMG) activity, including resting baseline and contraction amplitude (\u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMore than half of women experienced LUTS 42 days after delivery. Nocturia, frequency, urgency, and SUI were the most prevalent LUTS. Straining and UI were most frequently reported as bothersome, while UI caused severe discomfort. VD, especially FD, was more likely to cause pelvic floor muscle or nerve damage and was the strongest predictor of storage LUTS.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms 6 weeks after delivery and the relationship of pelvic floor muscle function","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-05-15 15:41:37","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4364318/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"bf3a6c64-3278-4bc3-a4f4-027a6ffcb5e5","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 15th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-11-15T09:38:48+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-05-15 15:41:37","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4364318","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4364318","identity":"rs-4364318","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}