CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02355327Updated Jun 23, 2016

Vibrating Vaginal Balls After Childbirth

An interventional study of Laselle Kegel Exerciser and Pelvic floor muscle exercises in Pelvic Floor Health After Childbirth, sponsored by City, University of London. Completed at 1 site in Austria. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-06-23.

Sponsored by City, University of London · Not applicable and Interventional

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
56
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This feasibility trial aims at assessing practical issues and feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine the effectiveness of vibrating vaginal pelvic floor training balls for postpartum pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation, at monitoring harms of the experimental intervention, and at exploring women´s perspectives on and experiences with the interventions and the trial.

Read the detailed description

Background: Pelvic floor muscle training after childbirth is recommended to prevent or treat urinary incontinence and other pelvic floor problems. A device that is sometimes recommended to women in Austria to enhance their pelvic floor muscles are vibrating vaginal pelvic floor training balls. To date, only a small study on vibrating balls exists, and it researched women with urinary incontinence and not women after childbirth. Therefore, research is needed to scientifically objectify the popular claim of these balls´ effectiveness in the postpartum period and further evidence based practice.

Method: The tested study features comprise

  • recruitment strategies,
  • inclusion and exclusion criteria,
  • the necessary number of participants,
  • the randomisation procedure,
  • the interventions themselves,
  • concordance and retention measures,
  • data collection,
  • effectiveness outcomes,
  • a survey of women's views of and experiences,
  • statistics and content analysis.

Results: The results of this trial will inform the features and feasibility of a future full RCT. It will be concluded that a full RCT to determine the effectiveness of vibrating vaginal pelvic floor training balls post partum is feasible as planned, feasible with modifications or not feasible. If considered feasible, the results will enable the full study to be planned correctly.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pelvic Floor Health After Childbirth
03

In context

Lead sponsor

City, University of London is the lead sponsor of 25 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Women from 6 weeks to 6 months after vaginal childbirth (at beginning of intervention)
  • Term birth, i.e. 37+0 or more weeks of gestation
  • 6 weeks postpartum check by obstetrician-gynaecologist performed and woman discharged from postpartum care with diagnostic findings appropriate to this period after childbirth
  • Lochia have ceased
  • Baby alive/not seriously ill
  • Sufficient knowledge of written and spoken German to be able to participate in the study
  • Capacity to consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Currently enrolled in pelvic floor muscle training with physiotherapist, midwife or fitness trainer
  • Status post perineal tear 3rd or 4th degree at most recent birth
  • Status post continence surgery
  • Current pelvic floor or gynaecological surgery
  • Current infection of genitourinary tract
  • Recurrent (>5 infectious episodes during last 12 months) or chronic (>3 weeks duration of single episode in last 12 months) vaginal infections
  • Neuromuscular conditions influencing pelvic floor muscle function (e.g. multiple sclerosis)
  • Major medical condition influencing infectious risk (diabetes, immune suppressive therapy, HIV infection etc.)
  • Currently on medication that could interfere with treatment or evaluation
  • Currently enrolled in any other research study
  • Pregnancy (also commencing during participation) or pregnancy planned within the study period
  • Retention of ball is impossible
  • Inability to perform the proposed procedures
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
56 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Laselle Kegel Exerciser

    Device: Laselle Kegel Exerciser

  • Active comparator
    Pelvic floor muscle exercises

    Behavioral: Pelvic floor muscle exercises

Interventions

  • DeviceLaselle Kegel Exerciser

    Participants use a vibrating pelvic floor muscle training ball for 12 weeks. The ball is inserted into the vagina and left for 15 minutes daily in the first week, and if well tolerated 30 minutes daily from the second week onwards. To achieve the vibrating effect, the balls are worn while moving - performing everyday tasks or going for a walk.

  • BehavioralPelvic floor muscle exercises

    Participants get standard care after childbirth, which is the routine recommendation of pelvic floor muscle exercises. Participants will be asked to continue/start the pelvic floor muscle exercises they routinely were recommended by customary written instructions from their health professionals after birth. Intervention duration for this study is 12 weeks.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Feasibility as measured by recruitment rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending recruitment

  2. Feasibility as measured by pre intervention pelvic floor muscle measurement attendance rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  3. Feasibility as measured by start of intervention rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  4. Feasibility as measured by concordance rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  5. Feasibility as measured by retention rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  6. Feasibility as measured by post intervention data collection attendance rate

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  7. Feasibility as measured by staff necessary

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  8. Feasibility as measured by time necessary

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

  9. Feasibility as measured by budget necessary

    Time frame: Within 4 weeks of ending data collection

Other outcomes

  1. Participant reported pelvic floor muscle outcomes as measured by structured questionnaire

    Questionnaire contains self-designed section and also includes the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ UI)

    Time frame: Within 3 weeks before the intervention

  2. Participant reported pelvic floor muscle outcomes as measured by structured questionnaire

    Questionnaire contains self-designed section and also includes the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ UI)

    Time frame: Within 2 weeks after the intervention

  3. Pelvic floor muscle performance as measured by perineometry

    By blinded external assessor

    Time frame: Within 4 days before the intervention

  4. Pelvic floor muscle performance as measured by perineometry

    By blinded external assessor

    Time frame: Within 2 weeks after the intervention

  5. Women´s perspectives and experiences as measured by structured interviews

    28 of 56 women

    Time frame: Within 3 weeks before the intervention

  6. Women´s perspectives and experiences as measured by structured interviews

    Same 28 of 56 women as for previous outcome measure

    Time frame: Within 2 weeks after the intervention

  7. Women´s perspectives and experiences as measured by structured anonymous questionnaire

    28 of 56 women (those not included in the two previous outcome measures)

    Time frame: Within 3 weeks after the intervention

  8. Concordance to interventions as measured by training diary

    Time frame: At time of intervention (12 weeks)

  9. Type, severity and number of adverse events as measured by active and passive surveillance (interview, self-report)

    Time frame: At time of intervention (12 weeks)

  10. Type, severity and number of adverse events as measured by active and passive surveillance (interview/questionnaire, self-report)

    First 28 of 56 women: interview, second 28 of 56 women: questionnaire

    Time frame: Up to 1 year after end of intervention

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Medical University of Vienna
    Vienna, 1090, Austria
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Oblasser C, Christie J, McCourt C. Vaginal cones or balls to improve pelvic floor muscle performance and urinary continence in women postpartum: a quantitative systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. J Adv Nurs. 2015 Apr;71(4):933-41. doi: 10.1111/jan.12566. Epub 2014 Nov 10. PubMed 25382375 ↗
  • Oblasser C, Christie J, McCourt C. Vaginal cones or balls to improve pelvic floor muscle performance and urinary continence in women post partum: A quantitative systematic review. Midwifery. 2015 Nov;31(11):1017-25. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2015.08.011. Epub 2015 Sep 9. PubMed 26428191 ↗
  • Oblasser C, McCourt C, Hanzal E, Christie J. Vibrating vaginal balls to improve pelvic floor muscle performance in women after childbirth: a protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial. J Adv Nurs. 2016 Apr;72(4):900-14. doi: 10.1111/jan.12868. Epub 2015 Dec 28. PubMed 26708615 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 23, 2016, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02355327
Lead sponsor
City, University of London
Collaborators
Medical University of Vienna
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 4, 2015
Start date
Feb 2015
Primary completion
May 2016
Completion
May 2016
Last update
Jun 23, 2016

Study contacts

Claudia Oblasser, MA, cand.PhD
principal investigator · City, University of London
Engelbert Hanzal, MD, Prof.
principal investigator · Medical University of Vienna

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion