2014PubMedOpen access

Biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise therapy for obstructive defecation: an effective alternative.

Ma-Mu-Ti-Jiang A ba-bai-ke-re, Ni-Re Wen, Yun-Long Hu, Liang Zhao, Tuerhongjiang Tuxun, Aierhati Husaiyin, Yalikun Sailai, Alimujiang Abulimiti, Yunhai Wang, Peng Yang

Open full text 19 citations

Abstract

AIM: To compare biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise therapy (BFT) with the use of oral polyethylene glycol (PEG) for the treatment of obstructive defecation. METHODS: A total of 88 subjects were assigned to treatment with either BFT (n = 44) or oral PEG (n = 44). Constipation symptoms (including difficult evacuation, hard stool, digitation necessity, incomplete emptying sensation, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, and constipation satisfaction), Wexner Scores, and quality of life scores were assessed after 1, 3, and 6 mo. RESULTS: At the 6 mo follow-up, the symptoms of the BFT group patients showed significantly greater improvements compared with the PEG group regarding difficult evacuation, hard stools, digitation necessity, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, constipation satisfaction, Wexner Constipation Score, and quality of life score (P < 0.05). The quality of life score of the BFT group at the final follow-up time (6 mo) was 80 ± 2.2. After a complete course of training, improvements in the clinical symptoms of the BFT group were markedly improved (P < 0.05), and the Wexner Constipation Scores were greatly decreased compared with the oral PEG group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that manometric biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise training is superior to oral polyethylene glycol therapy for obstructive defecation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM: To compare biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise therapy (BFT) with the use of oral polyethylene glycol (PEG) for the treatment of obstructive defecation. METHODS: A total of 88 subjects were assigned to treatment with either BFT (n = 44) or oral PEG (n = 44). Constipation symptoms (including difficult evacuation, hard stool, digitation necessity, incomplete emptying sensation, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, and constipation satisfaction), Wexner Scores, and quality of life scores were assessed after 1, 3, and 6 mo. RESULTS: At the 6 mo follow-up, the symptoms of the BFT group patients showed significantly greater improvements compared with the PEG group regarding difficult evacuation, hard stools, digitation necessity, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, constipation satisfaction, Wexner Constipation Score, and quality of life score (P < 0.05). The quality of life score of the BFT group at the final follow-up time (6 mo) was 80 ± 2.2. After a complete course of training, improvements in the clinical symptoms of the BFT group were markedly improved (P < 0.05), and the Wexner Constipation Scores were greatly decreased compared with the oral PEG group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that manometric biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise training is superior to oral polyethylene glycol therapy for obstructive defecation.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 19 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIM: To compare biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise therapy (BFT) with the use of oral polyethylene glycol (PEG) for the treatment of obstructive defecation. METHODS: A total of 88 subjects were assigned to treatment with either BFT (n = 44) or oral PEG (n = 44). Constipation symptoms (including difficult evacuation, hard stool, digitation necessity, incomplete emptying sensation, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, and constipation satisfaction), Wexner Scores, and quality of life scores were assessed after 1, 3, and 6 mo. RESULTS: At the 6 mo follow-up, the symptoms of the BFT group patients showed significantly greater improvements compared with the PEG group regarding difficult evacuation, hard stools, digitation necessity, laxative dependence, perianal pain at defecation, constipation satisfaction, Wexner Constipation Score, and quality of life score (P < 0.05). The quality of life score of the BFT group at the final follow-up time (6 mo) was 80 ± 2.2. After a complete course of training, improvements in the clinical symptoms of the BFT group were markedly improved (P < 0.05), and the Wexner Constipation Scores were greatly decreased compared with the oral PEG group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that manometric biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise training is superior to oral polyethylene glycol therapy for obstructive defecation.

Key concepts: Medicine, Defecation, Constipation, Pelvic floor, Biofeedback, Laxative, Obstructed defecation, Quality of life (healthcare)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Biofeedback-guided pelvic floor exercise therapy for obstructive defecation: an effective alternative. — Research Paper | ScholarLens