Palsson Olafur S, Heymen Steve, Whitehead William E
Department of Medicine, Center for Functional Gastrointestinal and Motility Disorders, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7080, USA.
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2004 Sep;29(3):153-74. doi: 10.1023/b:apbi.0000039055.18609.64.
This review aimed to critically evaluate the literature on the efficacy of biofeedback for functional anorectal disorders, rate these biofeedback applications according to established guidelines, and make recommendations for this field based on the literature. The Medline and PsychInfo databases were searched to obtain all papers published from 1975 to 2003 that included the terms "biofeedback" and either "constipation" "pelvic floor dyssynergia" "fecal incontinence" or "anorectal pain." Adult and pediatric papers in any language were screened. Prospective studies with five or more participants and a description of the treatment protocol and outcome were selected for review. Seventy-four studies qualified for review: 33 trials on fecal incontinence (FI), 38 on pelvic floor dyssynergia (PFD) or functional constipation, and 3 on anorectal pain. Only 20% of studies were controlled outcome trials. Treatment protocols, etiological subgroups studied and outcome measures varied greatly. The overall average probability of successful treatment outcome for patients treated with biofeedback was 67.2% for functional FI and 62.4% for constipation. There were insufficient data to warrant such calculation for anorectal pain. According to standard efficacy rating criteria, biofeedback treatment is efficacious for functional constipation or PFD in children and probably efficacious in adults; probably efficacious for functional FI; and possibly efficacious for anorectal pain. Utilizing data from all applicable studies, we found that success rate per subject is significantly higher for biofeedback treatment than for standard medical care for PFD/functional constipation, and FI (p < .001 for both). Biofeedback treatment may therefore be viewed as a valuable adjunct to medical management of functional PFD/constipation and incontinence. A number of recommendations for future investigations are made based on the review.
本综述旨在严格评估关于生物反馈疗法治疗功能性肛门直肠疾病疗效的文献,根据既定指南对这些生物反馈疗法应用进行评级,并基于文献为该领域提出建议。检索了Medline和PsychInfo数据库,以获取1975年至2003年发表的所有包含“生物反馈”以及“便秘”“盆底协同失调”“大便失禁”或“肛门直肠疼痛”等术语的论文。筛选了任何语言的成人和儿科论文。选择了有五名或更多参与者且描述了治疗方案和结果的前瞻性研究进行综述。有74项研究符合综述要求:33项关于大便失禁(FI)的试验,38项关于盆底协同失调(PFD)或功能性便秘的试验,以及3项关于肛门直肠疼痛的试验。只有20%的研究是对照结局试验。治疗方案、所研究的病因亚组和结局测量差异很大。接受生物反馈治疗的患者功能性FI成功治疗结局的总体平均概率为67.2%,便秘为62.4%。对于肛门直肠疼痛,没有足够的数据进行此类计算。根据标准疗效评级标准,生物反馈治疗对儿童功能性便秘或PFD有效,对成人可能有效;对功能性FI可能有效;对肛门直肠疼痛可能有效。利用所有适用研究的数据,我们发现生物反馈治疗的每个受试者成功率显著高于PFD/功能性便秘和FI的标准医疗护理(两者p均<0.001)。因此,生物反馈治疗可被视为功能性PFD/便秘和失禁医疗管理的有价值辅助手段。基于该综述,对未来研究提出了一些建议。