Cited by 187Gastrointestinal motility and disordersPelvic floor disorders treatmentsIntestinal Malrotation and Obstruction Disorders

Currently recommended treatments of childhood constipation are not evidence based: a systematic literature review on the effect of laxative treatment and dietary measures

Open access
Pijpers, M A M, Tabbers, M M, Benninga, M A, Berger, M Y·2008·Archives of Disease in Childhood

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Constipation is a common complaint in children and early intervention with oral laxatives may improve complete resolution of functional constipation. However, most treatment guidelines are based on reviews of the literature that do not incorporate a quality assessment of the studies. OBJECTIVE: To investigate and summarise the quantity and quality of the current evidence for the effect of laxatives and dietary measures on functional childhood constipation. METHODS: The Medline and Embase databases were searched to identify studies evaluating the effect of a medicamentous treatment or dietary intervention on functional constipation. Methodological quality was assessed using a validated list of criteria. Data were statistically pooled, and in case of clinical heterogeneity results were summarised according to a best evidence synthesis. RESULTS: Of the 736 studies found, 28 met the inclusion criteria. In total 10 studies were of high quality. The included studies were clinically and statistically heterogeneous in design. Most laxatives were not compared to placebo. Compared to all other laxatives, polyethylene glycol (PEG) achieved more treatment success (pooled relative risk (RR): 1.47; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.76). Lactulose was less than or equally effective in increasing the defecation frequency compared to all other laxatives investigated. There was no difference in effect on defecation frequency between fibre and placebo (weighted standardised mean difference 0.35 bowel movements per week in favour of fibre, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.74). CONCLUSION: Insufficient evidence exists supporting that laxative treatment is better than placebo in children with constipation. Compared to all other laxatives, PEG achieved more treatment success, but results on defecation frequency were conflicting. Based on the results of this review, we can give no recommendations to support one laxative over the other for childhood constipation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/adc.2007.127233

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. Evaluation and treatment of constipation in children: summary of updated recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2006;43:405-7.
  2. Langhorst J, Szajewska H. [Probiotics and gastroenterology -The potentials are not inexhaustible.] Forschende Komplementarmedizin und Klassische Naturheilkunde 2005;12:295-6.
  3. Kavanagh P, O'Flanagan D. Varicella vaccine: Policy options for Ireland. Epi-Insight June 2008;9:2-3. http:// www.ndsc.ie/hpsc/ (accessed 27 Apr 2009).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pijpers, M. A. M., Tabbers, M. M., Benninga, M. A., & Berger, M. Y.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Pijpers, M A M
Venue
Archives of Disease in Childhood
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-09-18
Volume
94
Issue
2
Pages
117-131
ISSN
  • 0003-9888 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2044
OpenAlex
W2151296144
Cited by
187
References
56
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
FWCI
2.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Disease in Childhood (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Intestinal Malrotation and Obstruction Disorders
Keywords
pediatric constipation, functional constipation, laxatives, polyethylene glycol, lactulose, dietary fiber, dietary intervention, stool frequency, treatment efficacy, quality of evidence, best evidence synthesis
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Constipation, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Lactulose, Polyethylene Glycols, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Laxatives

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