Nonpharmacological conservative treatments for chronic functional constipation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Patients with functional chronic constipation (CFC) often select nonpharmacological treatments. We aimed to examine the comparative effectiveness of nonpharmacological conservative treatments in treating CFC. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, CINAHL, AMED, ISI web of knowledge, and conference proceedings from January 2000 to June 2016. Randomized controlled trials comparing nonpharmacological conservative treatments with placebo, sham interventions, or conventional treatments were included. Nonpharmacological conservative treatments were defined as interventions without involvement of medication or surgery. We extracted trial data in duplicate and assessed the risk of bias. We pooled continuous data using standard mean differences (SMDs) and binary data using risk ratios (RRs), and we provided their 95% confidence intervals. Key Results: We included 33 trials (4324 participants and 8 nonpharmacological treatments). Compared with placebo interventions, TENS (SMD 1.60, 95% CI 0.28-2.92), probiotic (SMD 1.40, 95% CI 0.94-1.86), and acupuncture (SMD 1.00, 95% CI 0.39-1.60) had significantly larger effect on stool frequency; acupuncture (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.14-2.14) had significantly higher responder rate; and moxibustion (SMD 2.50, 95% CI 0.05-4.95) had significant larger effect on Bristol score. Compared with laxative, acupuncture had significantly larger effect on stool frequency (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.16-3.49) and had lower rate of adverse events (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.80). Conclusions: TENS and acupuncture relatively ranked the best in managing CFC, but the results should be interpreted with caution due to small study effects. Registration number: PROSPERO CRD42014006686.