Functional bowel disorders in pregnancy: effect on quality of life, evaluation and management

Psychological comorbidities are more prevalent amongst pregnant and postpartum patients with irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data on the epidemiology of IBS in pregnant and postpartum patients in the United States.

METHODS

A retrospective claims analysis was conducted in a cohort of 1,618,379 patients with ≥1 delivery hospitalization between 2013-2019 utilizing ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes after merging inpatient and outpatient claims. Obstetric, psychological, and other medical comorbidities were also examined.

KEY RESULTS

The prevalence of IBS in our cohort was 1.38%. Pregnant and postpartum patients with IBS were more likely to have psychological comorbidities including depression (OR 2.93, CI 2.83-3.03), postpartum depression (OR 3.00, CI 2.91-3.09), and anxiety (OR 3.74, CI 3.64-3.84). They were also more likely to have migraines (OR 3.04, CI 2.94-3.15) and connective tissue disease or autoimmune disease (OR 3.54, CI 3.22-3.89).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of IBS in pregnant and postpartum patients in a large claims database was 1.38%. Pregnant and postpartum patients with IBS have a higher odd of psychological comorbidities in addition to medical comorbidities such as migraines, connective tissue, and autoimmune disease. Future studies should focus on validating and characterizing the impact and directionality of co-existing comorbidities on IBS severity and the development of new-onset IBS during pregnancy and the postpartum period.

The Effect of Bidet Use on Severity of Constipation and Quality of Life Among Pregnant Women

Background

Constipation is a common problem in pregnancy. This study aims to elucidate the efficacy of using a bidet before defecation to reduce the severity of constipation and improve the quality of life in pregnancy.

Methods

The sample consisted of an experimental group (n = 30) and a control group (n = 30), a total of 60 pregnant women. Randomization was performed using the pitch-and-toss method from simple probability randomization methods. The research data were collected using the Personal Information Form, the Constipation Assessment Scale for Pregnancy, and the Constipation Quality of Life Scale.

Results

There was a statistically significant difference between the pregnant women's mean scores on the Constipation Assessment Scale for Pregnancy due to the intervention of bidet before defecation. Although the members of the intervention group had severe constipation at first, they reported only "some problems" on defecation after the intervention. In addition, statistically significant improvements were observed in the intervention group via all subscales of the Constipation Quality of Life Scale except the satisfaction subscale.

Conclusion

Providing pregnant women with training on constipation and information about how to control constipation using a bidet is very important in terms of reducing the severity of constipation, enabling them to feel better and continue their daily activities, and thus to improve their quality of life.

Increased adiposity, inflammation, metabolic disruption and dyslipidemia in adult male offspring of DOSS treated C57BL/6 dams

Evidence indicates that obesity can be promoted by chemical ‘obesogens’ that drive adiposity, hunger, inflammation and suppress metabolism. Dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate (DOSS), a lipid emulsifier and candidate obesogen in vitro, is widely used in processed foods, cosmetics and as stool softener medicines commonly used during pregnancy. In vivo testing of DOSS was performed in a developmental origins of adult obesity model. Pregnant mice were orally administered vehicle control or DOSS at times and doses comparable to stool softener use during human pregnancy. All weaned offspring consumed only standard diet. Adult male but not female offspring of DOSS-treated dams showed significantly increased body mass, overall and visceral fat masses, and decreased bone area. They exhibited significant decreases in plasma adiponectin and increases in leptin, glucose intolerance and hyperinsulinemia. Inflammatory IL-6 was elevated, as was adipose Cox2 and Nox4 gene expressions, which may be associated with promoter DNA methylation changes. Multiple significant phospholipid/sterol lipid increases paralleled profiles from long-term high-fat diet induced obesity in males. Collectively, developmental DOSS exposure leads to increased adult adiposity, inflammation, metabolic disorder and dyslipidemia in offspring fed a standard diet, suggesting that pharmaceutical and other sources of DOSS taken during human pregnancy might contribute to long-term obesity-related health concerns in offspring.

Interventions for treating constipation in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Constipation is a common symptom experienced during pregnancy. It has a range of consequences from reduced quality of life and perception of physical health to haemorrhoids. An understanding of the effectiveness and safety of treatments for constipation in pregnancy is important for the clinician managing pregnant women.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for treating constipation in pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (30 April 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all published, unpublished and ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs, evaluating interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for constipation in pregnancy. Cross-over studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Trials published in abstract form only (without full text publication) were not eligible for inclusion.We compared one intervention (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) against another intervention, placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies were included, but only two studies with a total of 180 women contributed data to this review. It was not clear whether they were RCTs or quasi-RCTs because the sequence generation was unclear. We classified the overall risk of bias of three studies as moderate and one study as high risk of bias. No meta-analyses were carried out due to insufficient data.There were no cluster-RCTs identified for inclusion. Comparisons were available for stimulant laxatives versus bulk-forming laxatives, and fibre supplementation versus no intervention. There were no data available for any other comparisons.During the review process we found that studies reported changes in symptoms in different ways. To capture all data available, we added a new primary outcome (improvement in constipation) - this new outcome was not prespecified in our published protocol. Stimulant laxatives versus bulk-forming laxativesNo data were identified for any of this review's prespecified primary outcomes: pain on defecation, frequency of stools and consistency of stools.Compared to bulk-forming laxatives, pregnant women who received stimulant laxatives had significantly more improvement in constipation (risk ratio (RR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.09; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence), but also significantly more abdominal discomfort (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.73; 140 women, one study, low quality of evidence), and borderline difference in diarrhoea (RR 4.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.09; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence). In addition, there was no significant difference in women's satisfaction (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46; 140 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence).No usable data were identified for any of this review's secondary outcomes: quality of life; dehydration; electrolyte imbalance; acute allergic reaction; or asthma. Fibre supplementation versus no interventionPregnant women who received fibre supplementation had significantly higher frequency of stools compared to no intervention (mean difference (MD) 2.24 times per week, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.52; 40 women, one study, moderate quality of evidence). Fibre supplementation was associated with improved stool consistency as defined by trialists (hard stool decreased by 11% to 14%, normal stool increased by 5% to 10%, and loose stool increased by 0% to 6%).No usable data were reported for either the primary outcomes of pain on defecation and improvement in constipation or any of this review's secondary outcomes as listed above. Quality Five outcomes were assessed with the GRADE software: improvement in constipation, frequency of stools, abdominal discomfort, diarrhoea and women's satisfaction. These were assessed to be of moderate quality except for abdominal discomfort which was assessed to be of low quality. The results should therefore be interpreted with caution. There were no data available for evaluation of pain on defecation or consistency of stools.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for treating constipation in pregnancy, due to limited data (few studies with small sample size and no meta-analyses). Compared with bulk-forming laxatives, stimulant laxatives appear to be more effective in improvement of constipation (moderate quality evidence), but are accompanied by an increase in diarrhoea (moderate quality evidence) and abdominal discomfort (low quality evidence) and no difference in women's satisfaction (moderate quality evidence). Additionally, fibre supplementation may increase frequency of stools compared with no intervention (moderate quality evidence), although these results were of moderate risk of bias.There were no data for a comparison of other types of interventions, such as osmotic laxatives, stool softeners, lubricant laxatives and enemas and suppositories.More RCTs evaluating interventions for treating constipation in pregnancy are needed. These should cover different settings and evaluate the effectiveness of various interventions (including fibre, osmotic, and stimulant laxatives) on improvement in constipation, pain on defecation, frequency of stools and consistency of stools.

Prevalence of constipation in the German population - a representative survey (GECCO)

BACKGROUND

Variable prevalence rates between 2.4 and 35% have been reported for chronic constipation across different countries worldwide, with a low 5% for Germany.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

We conducted a computer-assisted telephone interview among 15,002 representative individuals in Germany, asking about health-related problems, including constipation. Those who acknowledged the presence of constipation symptoms during the preceding 12 months were questioned concerning constipation features and sociographic variables.

RESULTS

Of 15,002 individuals interviewed, 2,239 (14.9%) acknowledged having experienced constipation during the last 12 months, 864 (5.8%) reported constipation during the last 4 weeks, and 380 (2.5%) had current constipation symptoms; 4.4% had taken medication because of their constipation, and 2.6% had consulted a doctor for constipation. In comparison to non-constipated volunteers, those constipated had a lower health quality of life and poorer health, and lower income and social status.

CONCLUSION

Up to 15% of the general (German) population report symptoms of constipation depending on the definition. This matches pooled constipation rates across 18 countries (14%).