Table 2.
Study, country | Comparison | Design | Eligible population | Constipation criteria | Intervention and duration | Number of patients and mean age | Primary outcome | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kinnunen and Salokannel32 (1987), Finland | Bulk vs Osmotic | Randomized, cross-over study | Geriatric long-stay patients aged 65 yr or older | Patients using laxatives |
|
|
|
|
Kinnunen et al33 (1993), Finland | Bulk + stimulant vs Osmotic | Open, randomized controlled, cross-over study | Geriatric long-stay patients aged 65-94 yr with constipation | BMs < 2/wk for more than 3 mo |
|
|
|
|
Passmore et al34 (1993), UK | Bulk + stimulant vs Osmotic | Randomized, double-blind, cross-over study | Long stay elderly patients or nursing home care with a history of chronic constipation | History of chronic constipation (< 3 BMs/wk) or need for regular laxatives |
|
|
|
|
Pers and Pers35 (1983), Sweden | Bulk + stimulant vs Bulk + stimulant | Open, randomized, controlled, cross-over study | Hospitalized elderly patients with constipation | Chronic constipation necessitating laxative treatment |
|
|
BMs/wk | A: 3.3 B: 3.9a |
aP < 0.05, bP < 0.01.
F, female; BMs, bowel movements; qd, 4 times a day; bid, 2 times a day; NS, not significant.