« Previous Next » Gastroenterology
Volume 130, Issue 3 , Pages 657-664 , March 2006

Biofeedback Is Superior to Laxatives for Normal Transit Constipation Due to Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia

Giuseppe Chiarioni
- Gastrointestinal Rehabilitation Division, Valeggio sul Mincio Hospital, Azienda Ospedaliera and University of Verona, Verona, Italy
- Address requests for reprints to: Giuseppe Chiarioni, MD, Divisione di Riabilitazione Gastroenterologica dell’Università di Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera di Verona, Centro Ospedaliero Clinicizzato, 37067 Valeggio sul Mincio (VR), Italy; fax: (39) 04579 50188.
William E. Whitehead
- UNC Center for Functional Gastrointestinal and Motility Disorders, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Vincenzo Pezza
- II Surgical Division, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Azienda Ospedaliera, Reggio Emilia, Italy
Antonio Morelli
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology Section, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliera and University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Gabrio Bassotti
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology Section, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliera and University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

Received 30 August 2005 ,Accepted 9 November 2005.

CONSORT table showing the disposition of all patients.

CONSORT table showing the disposition of all patients.
- Full-Size Image
- Download to PowerPoint
Proportion of laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars) reporting different treatment outcomes at 6 months. *Differences between groups were significant at

Proportion of laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars) reporting different treatment outcomes at 6 months. *Differences between groups were significant at P < .001.
- Full-Size Image
- Download to PowerPoint
Average number of bowel movements per week accompanied by straining in laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars). T bars show standard errors. *Indicates si

Average number of bowel movements per week accompanied by straining in laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars). T bars show standard errors. *Indicates significant difference (P < .01) between groups at 6 months or 12 months; #indicates a significant (P < .01) change from pretreatment within the biofeedback group.
- Full-Size Image
- Download to PowerPoint
Average number of incomplete bowel movements per week in laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars). T bars show standard errors. *Indicates significant diff

Average number of incomplete bowel movements per week in laxative-treated patients (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated patients (solid bars). T bars show standard errors. *Indicates significant difference (P < .01) between groups at 6 months or 12 months; #indicates a significant (P < .01) change from pretreatment within the biofeedback group.
- Full-Size Image
- Download to PowerPoint
Proportion of laxative-treated (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated (solid bars) patients who exhibited paradoxical increases in pelvic floor EMG when straining to defecate at each time point. *Group

Proportion of laxative-treated (shaded bars) and biofeedback-treated (solid bars) patients who exhibited paradoxical increases in pelvic floor EMG when straining to defecate at each time point. *Groups were significantly different (P < .001) at 6 and 12 months.
- Full-Size Image
- Download to PowerPoint