BIOFEEDBACK TREATMENT OF CONSTIPATION - A COMPARISON OF 2 METHODS

Objectives: Our purpose in this study was to determine whether, with b alloon feedback treatment, one can obtain results similar to those ach ieved with electromyographic (EMG) feedback treatment, in patients wit h a functional outlet obstruction (spastic pelvic floor syndrome). Met hods: In a randomized controlled study, 11 patients received EMG biofe edback and nine patients received balloon feedback. Treatment outcome was assessed by standard EMG during straining, constipation score, and a standard diary with details about complaints. Results: Using change scores (posttreatment score minus pretreatment score), we found signi ficantly greater positive changes for EMG feedback at posttreatment an d at follow-up. When criteria for good clinical outcome were used, eig ht of 11 patients treated with EMG feedback appeared to be improved, a gainst two of nine patients treated with balloon feedback. Type of fee dback was the only difference between the groups. Conclusions: Alterat ion of the EMG pattern leads to lessening of complaints, which means t hat pelvic floor contraction during straining indeed is the cause of t he constipation. The results suggest that EMG feedback is more effecti ve than balloon feedback in treating spastic pelvic floor syndrome.