Skip to Content
Interactive Textbook on Clinical Symptom Research Logo


Home Button

Clinical Research: Constipation Sections
Author Biography
Introduction
What is constipation?
Understanding the problem
Objective Measurement
Subjective Measurement
Measuring Components
Precipitating Factors
Currently Selected Section: Therapeutic Comparisons
Research Questions
Conclusion




Chapter 3: Methods for Clinical Research in Constipation: Therapeutic Comparisons
 

Good results have been reported for improvement in constipation associated with the spastic pelvic floor syndrome through the use of biofeedback (Bleijenberg and Kuijpers, 1987), but results for operative treatment of slow colonic transit or the presence of rectocele are often mediocre. As a consequence, laxatives remain a mainstay of treatment of functional constipation and certainly of constipation associated with medical illness.

Hence, knowledge of the relative effectiveness of different laxative preparations is clinically important. This applies not only to laxatives administered orally but also to those given rectally as enemas or suppositories.

Trial design of symptom management

While the gold standard randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been widely used in laxative comparisons, blinding to the preparations used is often difficult because of the widely differing physical properties of various laxative preparations. For drug trials of symptom control, in general, or constipation, in particular, many inherent issues must be addressed including:

  • Parallel group or crossover
  • Duration of study period
  • Value of a placebo arm
  • Length of washout period
  • Dose flexibility and rescue medication
  • Eligibility, endpoints, and practical considerations

Parallel group or crossover

Crossover trials hold the benefit of requiring a smaller number of subjects in order to establish a significant result, as the variability is only within subjects rather than between them (Hills and Armitage, 1979). The disadvantage is that the length of the trial is at least doubled and this may, depending on the nature of the population, greatly increase the dropout rate.

Duration of study period

This is clearly a function of the characteristics of both the intervention being studied and the patient group involved. The latency of action of stimulant laxatives is eight hours or more, and that of softening agents around three days, so a trial of oral laxatives should probably last at least a week. To avoid confusion by the inherent natural variability in bowel habit and by carry-over effects of previous laxative medication, longer trial periods of four to eight weeks or more are common in studies in chronic constipation. Desirable as such study durations might be, they are not necessarily available in palliative care populations that suffer a rapidly changing clinical picture and high attrition through disease progression.


Page 24 of 36
      Previous Section