| Literature DB >> 23351337 |
Seyyed Ali Mozaffarpur1, Mohsen Naseri, Mohammad Reza Esmaeilidooki, Mohammad Kamalinejad, Ali Bijani.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of Pediatric Functional Constipation (FC) has been reported between 0.7% to 29.6%. This study was conducted to compare the laxative effect of cassia fistula emulsion (CFE) with mineral oil (MO) on FC. Cassia fistula is named in Traditional Iranian Medicine (TIM) as "Folus".Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23351337 PMCID: PMC3556012 DOI: 10.1186/2008-2231-20-83
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Daru ISSN: 1560-8115 Impact factor: 3.117
Figure 1Flow chart summarizing the study process in the two treatment groups of the children with functional constipation.
Baseline data of the children with functional constipation, in the two treatment groups of emulsion and mineral oil
| Age, months, Mean(±SD) | 69.4(±24.3) | 65.9(±19.1) | NS |
| Sex, Male, n (%) | 29(70.7%) | 23(57.5%) | NS |
| Weight, Kg(±SD) | 21.7 (±7.2) | 20.7(±7.8) | NS |
| Duration of constipation, months, Mean(±SD) | 34.2(±25.9) | 30.8(±22.8) | NS |
| Defecation ≤ 2 per week, n (%) | 32(78%) | 30(75%) | NS |
| Incontinence, n (%) | 31(75.6%) | 27(67.5%) | NS |
| History of previous treatment, n (%) | 32(78%) | 28(70%) | NS |
| Fecal impaction, n (%) | 23(56.1%) | 21(52.5%) | NS |
| Retentive posturing, n (%) | 32(78%) | 29(72.5%) | NS |
NS: Not Significant.
Figure 2A: Defecation frequency, B: Fecal incontinence and C: Retentive posturing (C) in the two treatment groups of emulsion and mineral oil, in the children with functional constipation, before and after medication.
Figure 3A: Severity of pain and B: consistency of stool, in the two treatment groups of emulsion and mineral oil, in the children with functional constipation, by the score of Visual Analog Scale.
Outcome data of the children with functional constipation, in two groups of emulsion and mineral oil, before and after medication
| Defecation /w (±SD) | 1.7(±1.3)NS | 10.7(±6.4)c | 11(±6)c | 10.6(±5.7)c | |
| Mineral oil | 2(±1.7) | 5.8(±4.3) | 5.8(±4.3) | 6.1(±4.5) | |
| Fecal Incontinence /w (±SD) | 19.2 (±21.7)NS | 4.9(±10.4)NS | 3.9(±10.1)NS | 3(±9.1)NS | |
| Mineral oil | 16.6 (±18.7) | 6.1(±11.5) | 6.3(±11.8) | 6.4(±11.1) | |
| Retentive Posturing/w (±SD) | 17.7 (±19.9)NS | 6.8(±14.5)NS | 6(±12.5)NS | 4.1(±8.9)NS | |
| Mineral oil | 15.3 (±17.7) | 5.9(±9.6) | 5.5(±9.9) | 4(±8.8) | |
| severity of pain (VAS) (±SD) | 60.9(±21.5)NS | 19.8(±17.8)a | 9.5(±11.7)c | 4.8(±8.5)c | |
| Mineral oil | 58.1(±22.6) | 31.5(±23.1) | 24.8(±21.1) | 20.1(±19.9) | |
| consistency of stool (VAS) (±SD) | 71.9(±11.9)NS | 24.2(±21)c | 16.2(±16.9)c | 11.9(±16.8)b | |
| Mineral oil | 70(±15) | 42.1(±22.8) | 32.3(±24.2) | 25.4(±22) | |
| Acceptance and Tolerance (±SD) | - | 2.8(±1.7)NS | 2.5(±1.5)NS | 2.2(±1.5)NS | |
| Mineral oil | - | 2.7(±.5) | 2.4(±1.4) | 2.4(±1.3) | |
/w: per week, VAS: Visual Analog Scale, NS: Not Significant, ap < 0.05 vs mineral oil, bp < 0.01 vs mineral oil, cp < 0.001 vs mineral oil.
Comparison the effect of treatment in the children with functional constipation, in two groups of emulsion and mineral oil, before and after medication
| | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | ||||||||||
| Inside the criteria of Rome ІІІ | 6/6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 5/6 | 11 | 9 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | ||
| (Not improved) | 4/6 | 15 | 17 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | |
| 3/6 | 9 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 5 | ||
| 2/6 | 2 | 6 | 13 | 8 | 11 | 8 | 4 | 7 | ||
| Out of criteria | 1/6 | - | - | 8 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 12 | 8 | |
| (Improved) | 0/6 | - | - | 8 | 7 | 13 | 6 | 19 | 9 | |