Department of Community and Family Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital Yun-Lin Branch, Yun-Lin, Taiwan.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:923190. doi: 10.1155/2012/923190. Epub 2012 Mar 18.
Many institutionalized patients and their healthcare providers are dissatisfied with current laxative therapy. This study compared therapeutic efficacy, safety, and laxative cost of an herbal formula (CCH1) and lactulose for long stay patients with constipation. In this double-blind, double-dummy, and placebo-controlled trial, we randomized 93 residents with chronic constipation from two long-term care facilities in Taiwan to receive either CCH1 with lactulose placebo or CCH1 placebo with lactulose for 8 weeks, then followed up for 4 weeks without study medication. Both treatments were effective and well tolerated for patients, but CCH1 produced more spontaneous bowel movements, less rectal treatments, less amount of rescue laxative, and lower laxative cost than lactulose during treatment. No significant differences were found in stool consistency, stool amount, global assessment, and safety concerns. In conclusion, our results suggest that CCH1 may have better efficacy and could be used as an alternative option to lactulose in the treatment of constipation in long-term care.
许多住院患者及其医疗保健提供者对当前的泻药治疗不满意。本研究比较了一种草药配方(CCH1)和乳果糖对长期住院便秘患者的治疗效果、安全性和泻药成本。在这项双盲、双模拟、安慰剂对照试验中,我们将来自台湾两家长期护理机构的 93 名慢性便秘住院患者随机分为两组,分别接受 CCH1 加乳果糖安慰剂或 CCH1 安慰剂加乳果糖治疗 8 周,然后在没有研究药物的情况下继续随访 4 周。两种治疗方法对患者均有效且耐受良好,但与乳果糖相比,CCH1 在治疗期间产生更多的自发性肠蠕动、更少的直肠治疗、更少的救急泻药用量和更低的泻药成本。在粪便稠度、粪便量、总体评估和安全性方面没有发现显著差异。总之,我们的结果表明,CCH1 可能具有更好的疗效,可以作为长期护理中治疗便秘的乳果糖替代选择。