Contribution of behavior therapy and biofeedback to laxative therapy in the treatment of pediatric encopresis

58Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

A model incorporating physiological, behavioral, and psychological parameters are presented to explain the maintenance and consequences of pediatric encopresis. It was hypothesized that the more comprehensive a treatment in addressing these parameters, the more efficacious it would be and the more children it would benefit. Eighty-seven children between the ages of 6 and 15 with the primary complaint of encopresis were randomly assigned to one of three treatments: (a) Intensive Medical Care (IMC), receiving enemas for disimpaction and laxatives to promote frequent bowel movements; (b) Enhanced Toilet Training (ETT), using reinforcement and scheduling to promote response to defecation urges and instruction and modeling to promote appropriate straining, along with laxatives and enemas; or (c) Biofeedback (BF), directed at relaxing the external anal sphincter during attempted defecation, along with toilet training, laxatives, and enemas. Three months following initiation of treatment, ETT and BF produced similar reductions in soiling/child (76% and 65%) that were superior (p's < .04) to IMC (21%). ETT significantly benefited more children than the other two treatments, employing fewer laxatives and fewer treatment sessions at a lower cost. Consistent with the presented model, reduction in soiling was associated with an increase in bowel movements in the toilet, reduction in parental prompting to use the toilet, and defecation pain. These results demonstrate that ETT should be used routinely with laxative therapy in the treatment of chronic encopresis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cox, D. J., Sutphen, J., Borowitz, S., Kovatchev, B., & Ling, W. (1998). Contribution of behavior therapy and biofeedback to laxative therapy in the treatment of pediatric encopresis. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 20(2), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884451

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free