TY - JOUR
T1 - A Comparison of the Efficacy of Enema Solutions in Pediatric Emergency Department Patients
AU - Anderson, Julie
AU - Furnival, Ronald A.
AU - Zhang, Lei
AU - Lunos, Scott A.
AU - Sadiq, Zujaja
AU - Strutt, Jonathan R.
AU - Kaila, Rahul
AU - Hendrickson, Marissa A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - Background: Children presenting to pediatric emergency departments (EDs) are frequently given enemas for relief of constipation symptoms; there is very little literature guiding solution selection. Objective: Our aim was to assess and compare the efficacy of the various enema solutions used in a pediatric ED, including the “pink lady,” a previously unreported compounded combination of docusate, magnesium citrate, mineral oil, and sodium phosphate. Methods: We identified all children who received any enema over a 5-year period in an urban, quaternary care pediatric ED for inclusion in the study via electronic record review. Physician investigators retrospectively reviewed routine visit documentation to confirm the type and dosage of enema and assess comorbidities, indications, efficacy, and side effects. Subjective descriptions of output were classified as none, small, medium, or large by reviewer consensus. Results: There were 768 records included. Median age was 6.2 years (interquartile range 3.3–10.3 years). Solutions used were sodium phosphate (n = 396), pink lady (n = 198), soap suds (n = 160), and other (n = 14). There was no significant difference in output by solution type (p = 0.88). Volume delivered was highest for pink lady, with no significant association between volume delivered and output (p = 0.48). Four percent of patients had side effects. Soap suds had a significantly higher rate of side effects (10.6%; p = 0.0003), primarily abdominal pain. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in reported stool output produced by sodium phosphate, soap suds, and pink lady enemas in children treated in an ED. Further study via randomized controlled trials would be beneficial in guiding selection of enema solution.
AB - Background: Children presenting to pediatric emergency departments (EDs) are frequently given enemas for relief of constipation symptoms; there is very little literature guiding solution selection. Objective: Our aim was to assess and compare the efficacy of the various enema solutions used in a pediatric ED, including the “pink lady,” a previously unreported compounded combination of docusate, magnesium citrate, mineral oil, and sodium phosphate. Methods: We identified all children who received any enema over a 5-year period in an urban, quaternary care pediatric ED for inclusion in the study via electronic record review. Physician investigators retrospectively reviewed routine visit documentation to confirm the type and dosage of enema and assess comorbidities, indications, efficacy, and side effects. Subjective descriptions of output were classified as none, small, medium, or large by reviewer consensus. Results: There were 768 records included. Median age was 6.2 years (interquartile range 3.3–10.3 years). Solutions used were sodium phosphate (n = 396), pink lady (n = 198), soap suds (n = 160), and other (n = 14). There was no significant difference in output by solution type (p = 0.88). Volume delivered was highest for pink lady, with no significant association between volume delivered and output (p = 0.48). Four percent of patients had side effects. Soap suds had a significantly higher rate of side effects (10.6%; p = 0.0003), primarily abdominal pain. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in reported stool output produced by sodium phosphate, soap suds, and pink lady enemas in children treated in an ED. Further study via randomized controlled trials would be beneficial in guiding selection of enema solution.
KW - constipation
KW - efficacy
KW - enema
KW - pink lady
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072828744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072828744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.07.009
DO - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.07.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 31594739
AN - SCOPUS:85072828744
SN - 0736-4679
VL - 57
SP - 461
EP - 468
JO - Journal of Emergency Medicine
JF - Journal of Emergency Medicine
IS - 4
ER -