Anal Plugs for the Management of Fecal Incontinence in Children and Adults

A Randomized Control Trial

Christine Margaret Bond, George Youngson, Isobel MacPherson, Andrew Garrett, Norma Bain, Sheena Donald, Tatiana MacFarlane

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Goals: To evaluate the contribution of the anal plug to the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults.

Background: Effective management of fecal incontinence remains problematic. Previous studies of an anal plug have yielded conflicting results.

Study: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention was the Conveen anal plug (Coloplast Limited) used for 12 months. Outcomes measures included: generic measures of child health [Functional Status II-R, Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF50) and Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project Charts]; generic measures of adult health for patients and carers (the SF-36, and Patient Generated and Carer Generated indices); condition-specific measures for adults and children; qualitative interviews, bowel charts, and diaries. The main outcome measure was a condition-specific score on a 0 to 100 scale, where 0 was the most severe and 100 was the least severe incontinence.

Results: Thirty-one intervention and 17 control patients were recruited. Fecal incontinence was due to I of 3 reasons: congenital, acquired, and neurogenic. At baseline, patients managed their condition preemptively or protectively. Intervention patients used the plug as a complete management substitute or as an adjunct to existing management. The majority of intervention respondents retained the plug most of the time. There was greater improvement from baseline in mean condition-specific score in intervention group compared with control group but this difference was not statistically significant (t test P = 0.053). Complete data analysis using analysis of covariance showed the mean difference between the treatment groups in condition-specific score of 9.9 (95% confidence interval-1.4, 21.1). Intention to treat analyses using imputation showed similar results. There was generally greater improvement in intervention groups subjects using other measures for children, adults, and carers.

Conclusions: The anal plug is of benefit to the majority of patients. It does not suit all eligible patients with in situ plug retention being a problem for some.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)45-53
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Clinical Gastroenterology
Volume41
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2007

Keywords

  • anal plug
  • fecal incontinence
  • randomized controlled trial

Cite this

Anal Plugs for the Management of Fecal Incontinence in Children and Adults : A Randomized Control Trial. / Bond, Christine Margaret; Youngson, George; MacPherson, Isobel; Garrett, Andrew; Bain, Norma; Donald, Sheena; MacFarlane, Tatiana.

In: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, Vol. 41, No. 1, 01.2007, p. 45-53.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bond, Christine Margaret ; Youngson, George ; MacPherson, Isobel ; Garrett, Andrew ; Bain, Norma ; Donald, Sheena ; MacFarlane, Tatiana. / Anal Plugs for the Management of Fecal Incontinence in Children and Adults : A Randomized Control Trial. In: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology. 2007 ; Vol. 41, No. 1. pp. 45-53.
@article{8bbfa0593f794821a01bb85526fb4a1b,
title = "Anal Plugs for the Management of Fecal Incontinence in Children and Adults: A Randomized Control Trial",
abstract = "Goals: To evaluate the contribution of the anal plug to the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults.Background: Effective management of fecal incontinence remains problematic. Previous studies of an anal plug have yielded conflicting results.Study: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention was the Conveen anal plug (Coloplast Limited) used for 12 months. Outcomes measures included: generic measures of child health [Functional Status II-R, Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF50) and Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project Charts]; generic measures of adult health for patients and carers (the SF-36, and Patient Generated and Carer Generated indices); condition-specific measures for adults and children; qualitative interviews, bowel charts, and diaries. The main outcome measure was a condition-specific score on a 0 to 100 scale, where 0 was the most severe and 100 was the least severe incontinence.Results: Thirty-one intervention and 17 control patients were recruited. Fecal incontinence was due to I of 3 reasons: congenital, acquired, and neurogenic. At baseline, patients managed their condition preemptively or protectively. Intervention patients used the plug as a complete management substitute or as an adjunct to existing management. The majority of intervention respondents retained the plug most of the time. There was greater improvement from baseline in mean condition-specific score in intervention group compared with control group but this difference was not statistically significant (t test P = 0.053). Complete data analysis using analysis of covariance showed the mean difference between the treatment groups in condition-specific score of 9.9 (95{\%} confidence interval-1.4, 21.1). Intention to treat analyses using imputation showed similar results. There was generally greater improvement in intervention groups subjects using other measures for children, adults, and carers.Conclusions: The anal plug is of benefit to the majority of patients. It does not suit all eligible patients with in situ plug retention being a problem for some.",
keywords = "anal plug, fecal incontinence, randomized controlled trial",
author = "Bond, {Christine Margaret} and George Youngson and Isobel MacPherson and Andrew Garrett and Norma Bain and Sheena Donald and Tatiana MacFarlane",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/MCG.0b013e31802dcba5",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "45--53",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology",
issn = "0192-0790",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Anal Plugs for the Management of Fecal Incontinence in Children and Adults

T2 - A Randomized Control Trial

AU - Bond, Christine Margaret

AU - Youngson, George

AU - MacPherson, Isobel

AU - Garrett, Andrew

AU - Bain, Norma

AU - Donald, Sheena

AU - MacFarlane, Tatiana

PY - 2007/1

Y1 - 2007/1

N2 - Goals: To evaluate the contribution of the anal plug to the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults.Background: Effective management of fecal incontinence remains problematic. Previous studies of an anal plug have yielded conflicting results.Study: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention was the Conveen anal plug (Coloplast Limited) used for 12 months. Outcomes measures included: generic measures of child health [Functional Status II-R, Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF50) and Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project Charts]; generic measures of adult health for patients and carers (the SF-36, and Patient Generated and Carer Generated indices); condition-specific measures for adults and children; qualitative interviews, bowel charts, and diaries. The main outcome measure was a condition-specific score on a 0 to 100 scale, where 0 was the most severe and 100 was the least severe incontinence.Results: Thirty-one intervention and 17 control patients were recruited. Fecal incontinence was due to I of 3 reasons: congenital, acquired, and neurogenic. At baseline, patients managed their condition preemptively or protectively. Intervention patients used the plug as a complete management substitute or as an adjunct to existing management. The majority of intervention respondents retained the plug most of the time. There was greater improvement from baseline in mean condition-specific score in intervention group compared with control group but this difference was not statistically significant (t test P = 0.053). Complete data analysis using analysis of covariance showed the mean difference between the treatment groups in condition-specific score of 9.9 (95% confidence interval-1.4, 21.1). Intention to treat analyses using imputation showed similar results. There was generally greater improvement in intervention groups subjects using other measures for children, adults, and carers.Conclusions: The anal plug is of benefit to the majority of patients. It does not suit all eligible patients with in situ plug retention being a problem for some.

AB - Goals: To evaluate the contribution of the anal plug to the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults.Background: Effective management of fecal incontinence remains problematic. Previous studies of an anal plug have yielded conflicting results.Study: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention was the Conveen anal plug (Coloplast Limited) used for 12 months. Outcomes measures included: generic measures of child health [Functional Status II-R, Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF50) and Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project Charts]; generic measures of adult health for patients and carers (the SF-36, and Patient Generated and Carer Generated indices); condition-specific measures for adults and children; qualitative interviews, bowel charts, and diaries. The main outcome measure was a condition-specific score on a 0 to 100 scale, where 0 was the most severe and 100 was the least severe incontinence.Results: Thirty-one intervention and 17 control patients were recruited. Fecal incontinence was due to I of 3 reasons: congenital, acquired, and neurogenic. At baseline, patients managed their condition preemptively or protectively. Intervention patients used the plug as a complete management substitute or as an adjunct to existing management. The majority of intervention respondents retained the plug most of the time. There was greater improvement from baseline in mean condition-specific score in intervention group compared with control group but this difference was not statistically significant (t test P = 0.053). Complete data analysis using analysis of covariance showed the mean difference between the treatment groups in condition-specific score of 9.9 (95% confidence interval-1.4, 21.1). Intention to treat analyses using imputation showed similar results. There was generally greater improvement in intervention groups subjects using other measures for children, adults, and carers.Conclusions: The anal plug is of benefit to the majority of patients. It does not suit all eligible patients with in situ plug retention being a problem for some.

KW - anal plug

KW - fecal incontinence

KW - randomized controlled trial

U2 - 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31802dcba5

DO - 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31802dcba5

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 45

EP - 53

JO - Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology

JF - Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology

SN - 0192-0790

IS - 1

ER -