ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Evaluating high dose laxatives via nasogastric tube versus enemas in children with severe constipation: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesChildren with severe constipation often require disimpaction when standard treatments fail, typically involving high doses of oral laxatives or rectal enemas. Practice guidelines for nurses lack clear directives. This study compared the effectiveness of nasogastric laxatives versus rectal enemas in children aged 0-18 years and aimed to assess the pain and burden experienced by children and parents.
methodsA prospective cohort study was conducted between December 2018 and June 2022 at a Dutch pediatric outpatient clinic. Of 111 children with severe constipation, 70 participated: 51 (73%) received rectal enemas and 19 (27%) received nasogastric laxatives. Treatment choice was made by the pediatrician in consultation with the parents and, when possible, the child.
resultsAfter eight weeks, 98% (50/51) of enema-treated children and 89% (17/19) of those receiving nasogastric laxatives achieved effective stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale 3-5), with no significant difference in overall effectiveness (p = 0.177). Pain scores were higher for children treated with nasogastric laxatives, but not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in the reported burden for children or parents. Fecal incontinence was lower in the enema group (33% vs. 47%) but not statistically different.
conclusionsBoth nasogastric laxatives and rectal enemas were effective for disimpaction in children with severe constipation, with no significant difference in efficacy. Although enemas appeared to cause less pain and burden in children under twelve, this was not statistically significant. Further research is needed to address the effect of interprofessional approach and education on compliance and admission of this specific population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.