FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2085349650> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2085349650 endingPage "864" @default.
• W2085349650 startingPage "824" @default.
• W2085349650 abstract "BackgroundConstipation is a common clinical problem. Lactulose and Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) are both commonly used osmotic laxatives that have been shown to be effective and safe treatments for chronic constipation. However, there is no definitive data as to which provides the best treatment.ObjectivesTo identify and review all relevant data in order to determine whether Lactulose or Polyethylene Glycol is more effective at treating chronic constipation and faecal impaction.Search strategyWe searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of lactulose and polyethylene glycol in the management of faecal impaction and chronic constipation.Selection criteriaStudies were included if they were randomised controlled trials which compared lactulose with polyethylene glycol in the management of chronic constipation.Data collection and analysisData on study methods, participants, interventions used and outcomes measured was extracted from each study. Data was entered into the Cochrane Review Manager software (RevMan 5.0) and analysed using Cochrane MetaView.Main resultsIn the present meta-analysis, we considered for the first time all ten randomised controlled trials so far performed. The ten trials enrolled a total of 868 participants and were conducted between 1997 and 2007. The trials were conducted in six different countries. Participant age ranged from 3 months to 70 years. Adults only were recruited for 4 studies. Five trials reported stool frequency per week. Singularly taken, all showed that PEG resulted in a higher stool frequency per week when compared with Lactulose. Two trials reported form of stool on the Bristol Stool Scale, both studies reported a higher Bristol Stool Score when using PEG compared with lactulose (softer stool). Three trials reported relief of abdominal pain. Two favoured PEG in this outcome; one found Lactulose and PEG to be comparable in this outcome. Three trials reported on use of additional products, all favoured PEG as requiring less use of additional products.Authors' conclusionsThe findings of our work indicate that Polyethylene glycol is better than lactulose in outcomes of stool frequency per week, form of stool, relief of abdominal pain and the need for additional products. On subgroup analysis, this is seen in both adults and children, except for relief of abdominal pain. Polyethylene Glycol should be used in preference to Lactulose in the treatment of Chronic Constipation.Plain Language SummaryPolyethylene Glycol should be used in preference to Lactulose in the treatment of Chronic Constipation.Constipation is a common clinical problem, encompassing much more than reduced stool frequency. In this review we compared two commonly used osmotic laxatives, Lactulose and Polyethylene Glycol (PEG). The findings of our work indicate that PEG is better than lactulose in outcomes of stool frequency per week, form of stool, relief of abdominal pain and the need for additional products. This is seen in both adults and children. Only exception is for relief of abdominal pain, where PEG is better than lactulose in children, but not in adults (no difference is seen). We conclude that Polyethylene Glycol should be used in preference to Lactulose in the treatment of Chronic Constipation." @default.
• W2085349650 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2085349650 creator A5022106397 @default.
• W2085349650 creator A5074543506 @default.
• W2085349650 creator A5078130634 @default.
• W2085349650 creator A5090845718 @default.
• W2085349650 date "2011-04-20" @default.
• W2085349650 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2085349650 title "Cochrane Review: Lactulose versus Polyethylene Glycol for Chronic Constipation" @default.
• W2085349650 cites W175064844 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W1973472192 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W1981331700 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W1988393694 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W1990781366 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W1999411984 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2004197368 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2007109458 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2012125655 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2016948997 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2026694122 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2028024674 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2036895238 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2043862537 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2048391965 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2049042897 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2055299426 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2064201279 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2064947938 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2066417915 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2081387476 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2090144284 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2115636891 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2119545769 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2121613272 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2125665617 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2131385868 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2148085720 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2165844124 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2166386674 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2189028972 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2329804437 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2332353280 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2611380183 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2977570599 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W2978758919 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W4239866226 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W4247785397 @default.
• W2085349650 cites W4253107993 @default.
• W2085349650 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/ebch.741" @default.
• W2085349650 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2085349650 type Work @default.
• W2085349650 sameAs 2085349650 @default.
• W2085349650 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2085349650 countsByYear W20853496502015 @default.
• W2085349650 countsByYear W20853496502019 @default.
• W2085349650 countsByYear W20853496502021 @default.
• W2085349650 countsByYear W20853496502022 @default.
• W2085349650 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2085349650 hasAuthorship W2085349650A5022106397 @default.
• W2085349650 hasAuthorship W2085349650A5074543506 @default.
• W2085349650 hasAuthorship W2085349650A5078130634 @default.
• W2085349650 hasAuthorship W2085349650A5090845718 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C108797546 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C2777448540 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C2781112942 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C3017955636 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C535046627 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C108797546 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C126322002 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C168563851 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C2777448540 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C2781112942 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C3017955636 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C535046627 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C71924100 @default.
• W2085349650 hasConceptScore W2085349650C95190672 @default.
• W2085349650 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2085349650 hasLocation W20853496501 @default.
• W2085349650 hasOpenAccess W2085349650 @default.
• W2085349650 hasPrimaryLocation W20853496501 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W1138142122 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W17847393 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W2341390812 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W2386229854 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W2409784337 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W2419162974 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W2907129914 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W3014440905 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W3023776636 @default.
• W2085349650 hasRelatedWork W788566627 @default.
• W2085349650 hasVolume "6" @default.
• W2085349650 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2085349650 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2085349650 magId "2085349650" @default.

• next