Comparison of warm sitz bath and electronic bidet with a lower-force water flow for postoperative management after hemorrhoidectomy (BIDLOW).

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY BMC Surgery Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1186/s12893-024-02737-0
Yoon-Hye Kwon, Seung-Bum Ryoo, Heung-Kwon Oh, Jae Bum Lee, Hyung-Joong Jung, Kee-Ho Song, Seung Chul Heo, Rumi Shin, Joongyub Lee, Kyu Joo Park
{"title":"Comparison of warm sitz bath and electronic bidet with a lower-force water flow for postoperative management after hemorrhoidectomy (BIDLOW).","authors":"Yoon-Hye Kwon, Seung-Bum Ryoo, Heung-Kwon Oh, Jae Bum Lee, Hyung-Joong Jung, Kee-Ho Song, Seung Chul Heo, Rumi Shin, Joongyub Lee, Kyu Joo Park","doi":"10.1186/s12893-024-02737-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Electronic bidets can be a substitute for sitz baths, but no study has examined the use of electronic bidets to manage anal problems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized, controlled, single-blind, multicenter, parallel group trial was performed. Patients who underwent hemorrhoidectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to use the electronic bidet or warm sitz baths for 7 days after hemorrhoidectomy. The primary endpoint was the difference in the anal pain VAS score for 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients were assigned to the electronic bidet (51) or sitz bath (50) groups. Twenty-six patients dropped out after randomization, and the final analysis included 34 patients in the electronic bidet group and 41 in the sitz bath group. The VAS score for anal pain 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy did not differ between the electronic bidet and sitz bath groups (38.3 ± 21.9 vs. 42.0 ± 21.1, p = 0.453). The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of the VAS score in the electronic bidet group (81.22) was greater than the margin of noninferiority (46.20).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The VAS scores after hemorrhoidectomy did not differ between the electronic bidet and sitz bath groups, but the noninferiority of the electronic bidet to sitz baths for anal pain 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy was not verified.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT02353156, date: 02/02/2015).</p>","PeriodicalId":49229,"journal":{"name":"BMC Surgery","volume":"25 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11702218/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02737-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Electronic bidets can be a substitute for sitz baths, but no study has examined the use of electronic bidets to manage anal problems.

Methods: A randomized, controlled, single-blind, multicenter, parallel group trial was performed. Patients who underwent hemorrhoidectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to use the electronic bidet or warm sitz baths for 7 days after hemorrhoidectomy. The primary endpoint was the difference in the anal pain VAS score for 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy.

Results: Patients were assigned to the electronic bidet (51) or sitz bath (50) groups. Twenty-six patients dropped out after randomization, and the final analysis included 34 patients in the electronic bidet group and 41 in the sitz bath group. The VAS score for anal pain 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy did not differ between the electronic bidet and sitz bath groups (38.3 ± 21.9 vs. 42.0 ± 21.1, p = 0.453). The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of the VAS score in the electronic bidet group (81.22) was greater than the margin of noninferiority (46.20).

Conclusion: The VAS scores after hemorrhoidectomy did not differ between the electronic bidet and sitz bath groups, but the noninferiority of the electronic bidet to sitz baths for anal pain 7 days posthemorrhoidectomy was not verified.

Trial registration: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT02353156, date: 02/02/2015).

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
热坐浴与低压力水流电子坐浴盆在痔疮切除术后管理中的比较。
目的:电子坐浴盆可以代替坐浴盆,但没有研究调查过使用电子坐浴盆来解决肛门问题。方法:采用随机、对照、单盲、多中心、平行组试验。接受痔疮切除术的患者被随机分配(1:1)在痔疮切除术后使用电子坐浴盆或温坐浴7天。主要终点是痔疮切除术后7天肛门疼痛VAS评分的差异。结果:51例患者被分为电子坐浴盆组(51)和坐浴盆组(50)。随机分组后,26例患者退出,最终分析包括34例电子坐浴盆组和41例坐浴盆组。电子坐浴盆组和坐浴组7天肛门疼痛VAS评分差异无统计学意义(38.3±21.9比42.0±21.1,p = 0.453)。电子坐浴盆组VAS评分95%置信区间上限(81.22)大于非劣效性边际(46.20)。结论:痔疮切除术后电子坐浴盆组和坐浴组的VAS评分无差异,但电子坐浴盆对痔疮切除术后7天肛门疼痛的非劣效性尚未得到证实。试验注册:该试验在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册(注册号:NCT02353156,日期:02/02/2015)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Surgery
BMC Surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
391
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: BMC Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on surgical research, training, and practice.
期刊最新文献
Development of machine learning-based predictive models for seroma formation after transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Impact of bariatric surgeries on bone density in patients with severe obesity. Mitigating occupational hazards: the impact of physical activity on surgeons' physical and mental health - a scoping review. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma radiation-induced sarcoma in the skull base: a retrospective follow-up cohort study. Safety and feasibility of omitting routine endoscopic nasobiliary drainage after ERCP for common bile duct stones: a prospective comparative study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1