4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Improvement of quality of life in children with slow transit constipation after treatment with transcutaneous electrical stimulation

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
Volume 44, Issue 6, Pages 1268-1273

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.031

Keywords

Slow transit constipation; Quality of life; PedsQL; Children; Transcutaneous electrical stimulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Slow transit constipation (STC) causes intractable symptoms not responsive to medical treatment. Children have irregular bowel motions, colicky abdominal pain, and frequent soiling. Transcutaneous electrical stimulation using interferential current (interferential therapy [IFT]) is a novel treatment of STC. This Study assessed quality of life (QOL) in STC children before and after IFT treatment. Methods: Eligible STC children were randomized to receive either real or placebo IFT (12 sessions for 4 weeks). Questionnaires (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory) were administered before and 6 weeks after treatment, with parallel parent and child self-report scales. Higher scores indicate better QOL. Holschneider and Templeton scores were also obtained. The QOL scores were compared using paired t tests. Results: Thirty-three children (21 male), with a mean age of 11.8 years (range, 7.4-16.5 years), were recruited; 16 received real IFT. Child-perceived QOL was improved after real IFT compared with baseline (81.1 vs 72.9, P = .005) but not after placebo IFT (78.1 vs 74.9, P = .120). The Holschneider score improved after real IFT(10 vs 8, P = .015) but not after placebo IFT(9 vs 8, P = .112). Parentally perceived QOL was similar after real IFT (70.1 vs 70.3, P = .927) and placebo IFT (70.2 vs 69.8, P = .899). There were no differences in Templeton scores. Conclusion: Interferential therapy is a novel therapy for children with STC that improves their self-perceived QOL. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available