AIM: To evaluate the sensory characteristics of commercial bowel cleansing preparations. METHODS: Samples of 4 commercially available bowel cleansing preparations, namely polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG), PEG + ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc), sodium picosulfate (SPS), and oral sodium sulfate (OSS) were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions. Descriptive analysis was conducted (n = 14) using a 15-cm line scale with the Compusense at-hand(®) sensory evaluation software. Acceptability testing (n = 80) was conducted using the 9-point hedonic scale. In addition, a Just-About-Right (JAR) scale was included for the four basic tastes to determine their intensity compatibility with acceptability levels in the products. RESULTS: Samples were significantly different, in descriptive analysis, for all attributes (P < 0.05) except for sweetness. SPS received the highest ratings for turbidity, viscosity appearance, orange odor and orange flavor; PEG-Asc for citrus odor and citrus flavor; OSS for sweetener taste, sweet aftertaste, bitterness, astringency, mouthcoating, bitter aftertaste and throatburn, and along with PEG-Asc, the highest ratings for saltiness, sourness and adhesiveness. Acceptability results showed significant differences between the various samples (P < 0.05). SPS received significantly higher ratings for overall acceptability, acceptability of taste, odor and mouthfeel (P < 0.05). JAR ratings showed that PEG and PEG-Asc were perceived as slightly too salty; SPS and OSS were slightly too sweet, while SPS, PEG-Asc and OSS were slightly too sour and OSS slightly too bitter. While using small sample volumes was necessary to avoid unwanted purgative effects, acceptability ratings do not reflect the true effect of large volumes intake thus limiting the generalization of the results. CONCLUSION: Further improvements are needed to enhance the sensory profile and to optimize the acceptability for better compliance with these bowel cleansing solutions.
AIM: To evaluate the sensory characteristics of commercial bowel cleansing preparations. METHODS: Samples of 4 commercially available bowel cleansing preparations, namely polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG), PEG + ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc), sodium picosulfate (SPS), and oral sodium sulfate (OSS) were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions. Descriptive analysis was conducted (n = 14) using a 15-cm line scale with the Compusense at-hand(®) sensory evaluation software. Acceptability testing (n = 80) was conducted using the 9-point hedonic scale. In addition, a Just-About-Right (JAR) scale was included for the four basic tastes to determine their intensity compatibility with acceptability levels in the products. RESULTS: Samples were significantly different, in descriptive analysis, for all attributes (P < 0.05) except for sweetness. SPS received the highest ratings for turbidity, viscosity appearance, orange odor and orange flavor; PEG-Asc for citrus odor and citrus flavor; OSS for sweetener taste, sweet aftertaste, bitterness, astringency, mouthcoating, bitter aftertaste and throatburn, and along with PEG-Asc, the highest ratings for saltiness, sourness and adhesiveness. Acceptability results showed significant differences between the various samples (P < 0.05). SPS received significantly higher ratings for overall acceptability, acceptability of taste, odor and mouthfeel (P < 0.05). JAR ratings showed that PEG and PEG-Asc were perceived as slightly too salty; SPS and OSS were slightly too sweet, while SPS, PEG-Asc and OSS were slightly too sour and OSS slightly too bitter. While using small sample volumes was necessary to avoid unwanted purgative effects, acceptability ratings do not reflect the true effect of large volumes intake thus limiting the generalization of the results. CONCLUSION: Further improvements are needed to enhance the sensory profile and to optimize the acceptability for better compliance with these bowel cleansing solutions.
Authors: Ala I Sharara; Ali H Harb; Fayez S Sarkis; Jean M Chalhoub; Rami Badreddine; Fadi H Mourad; Mahmoud Othman; Omar Masri Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Ala I Sharara; Zeinab D El Reda; Ali H Harb; Carla G Abou Fadel; Fayez S Sarkis; Jean M Chalhoub; Rachel Abou Mrad Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Vladimir Kojecky; Jan Matous; Radan Keil; Milan Dastych; Radek Kroupa; Zdena Zadorova; Michal Varga; Jiri Dolina; Milan Kment; Ales Hep Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2017-09-24 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Umair Kamran; Abdullah Abbasi; Imran Tahir; James Hodson; Keith Siau Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 4.623