Cited by 121Gastrointestinal motility and disordersPelvic floor disorders treatmentsMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies

Pathophysiology and management of bowel dysfunction in multiple sclerosis

Wiesel, Paul H., Norton, Christine, Glickman, Scott, Kamm, Michael A.·2001·European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Abstract

The prevalence of bowel dysfunction in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients is higher than in the general population. Up to 70% of patients complain of constipation or faecal incontinence, which may also coexist. This overlap can relate to neurological disease affecting both the bowel and the pelvic floor muscles, or to treatments given. Bowel dysfunction is a source of considerable ongoing psychosocial disability in many patients with MS. Symptoms related to the bladder and the bowel are rated by patients as the third most important, limiting their ability to work, after spasticity and incoordination. Bowel management in patients with MS is currently empirical. Although general recommendations include maintaining a high fibre diet, high fluid intake, regular bowel routine, and the use of enemas or laxatives, the evidence to support the efficacy of these recommendations is scant. This review will examine the current state of knowledge regarding the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying bowel dysfunction in MS, outline the importance of proper clinical assessment of constipation and faecal incontinence during the diagnostic work-up, and propose various management possibilities. In the absence of clinical trial data on bowel management in MS, these should be considered as a consensus on clinical practice from a team specialized in bowel dysfunction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00042737-200104000-00025

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wiesel, P. H., Norton, C., Glickman, S., & Kamm, M. A.
Affiliations
St Mark's Hospital (GB)
Venue
European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Published
2001-04
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
441-448
ISSN
0954-691X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2056558967
Cited by
121
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
0.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, bowel dysfunction, constipation, fecal incontinence, pathophysiology, bowel management, laxatives, enema, fluid intake, psychosocial disability, pelvic floor, clinical evaluation
MeSH terms
Constipation, Fecal Incontinence, Humans, Multiple Sclerosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review