-OBJECTIVE: To determine with the highestlevel of evidence the efficacy of pelvic floor rehabilitationin the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women.METHODS: A systematic search was performed in theMEDLINE electronic database with the purpose to findrandomised and controlled clinical trials evaluating theefficacy of pelvic floor rehabilitation in the treatment ofstress urinary incontinence. A quantitative metanalysiswas performed then by the Logit method combining theresults from these studies to obtain an Odds ratio (OR)with its confidence interval. Moreover, it was determinedthe heterogeneity of the studies included in metanalysis bycalculus of the Cochrane Q component.RESULTS: 8 randomised controlled clinical trialsmatched the inclusion criteria. Global OR resulting fromthe combination of these studies was 7.03 (Confidenceinterval 4.99-9.89). Nevertheless, the heterogeneity of thestudies was significant, secondary among other circumstances to the fact that these studies did not establishthe difference between improvement and cure clearly.CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of the studies doesnot allow to state after metanalysis (maximum level ofscientific evidence) that pelvic floor rehabilitation iseffective in the treatment of woman’s stress urinaryincontinence. Nevertheless two randomised controlledstudies were found confirming that rehabilitation cureswoman’s stress urinary incontinence, from which there isgood scientific evidence in favour of this treatment.