BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Biofeedback therapy has been extensively used and accepted in fecal incontinence, but reports of its efficiency vary. We evaluated feedback therapy efficiency when (a) selecting the patient's subject of the therapy, and (b) customizing the therapy protocol used for each patient. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-three patients with fecal incontinence were selected for biofeedback training. The treatment program was customized for each patient depending on the underlying dysfunction, the patient's cooperative and learning attitude, and the patient's progress. Biofeedback efficiency was measured using clinical scores, subjective satisfaction of the patient, and manometry. RESULTS: Incontinent scores showed improvement in 66% of patients and good improvement in 11% and 15%, respectively, indicating an overall excellent effect of the therapy. Subjective satisfaction was strongly correlated with the previous incontinent scores. Comparison of manometry parameters before and after biofeedback therapy, including maximum anal resting, maximum anal squeeze pressure, and maximum duration of the squeeze, all showed significant differences. In addition, the sensory threshold significantly decreased after biofeedback therapy. Clinical improvements were maintained during the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: Biofeedback improves objective and subjective parameters of anorectal function. Selection of patients and customization of the therapy program increased biofeedback efficiency for the treatment of fecal incontinence.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Biofeedback therapy has been extensively used and accepted in fecal incontinence, but reports of its efficiency vary. We evaluated feedback therapy efficiency when (a) selecting the patient's subject of the therapy, and (b) customizing the therapy protocol used for each patient. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-three patients with fecal incontinence were selected for biofeedback training. The treatment program was customized for each patient depending on the underlying dysfunction, the patient's cooperative and learning attitude, and the patient's progress. Biofeedback efficiency was measured using clinical scores, subjective satisfaction of the patient, and manometry. RESULTS: Incontinent scores showed improvement in 66% of patients and good improvement in 11% and 15%, respectively, indicating an overall excellent effect of the therapy. Subjective satisfaction was strongly correlated with the previous incontinent scores. Comparison of manometry parameters before and after biofeedback therapy, including maximum anal resting, maximum anal squeeze pressure, and maximum duration of the squeeze, all showed significant differences. In addition, the sensory threshold significantly decreased after biofeedback therapy. Clinical improvements were maintained during the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: Biofeedback improves objective and subjective parameters of anorectal function. Selection of patients and customization of the therapy program increased biofeedback efficiency for the treatment of fecal incontinence.
Authors: S K Patankar; A Ferrara; S W Larach; P R Williamson; S E Perozo; J R Levy; J Mills Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: J O Keck; R J Staniunas; J A Coller; R C Barrett; M E Oster; D J Schoetz; P L Roberts; J J Murray; M C Veidenheimer Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Annette C Dobben; Maaike P Terra; Bary Berghmans; Marije Deutekom; Guy E E Boeckxstaens; Lucas W M Janssen; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jaap Stoker Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2005-10-22 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Byoung Hwan Lee; Nayoung Kim; Sung-Bum Kang; So Yeon Kim; Kyoung-Ho Lee; Bo Youn Im; Jung Hee Jee; Jane C Oh; Young Soo Park; Dong Ho Lee Journal: J Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 4.924