Safety and effectiveness of large-volume enema solutions

Appl Nurs Res. 2004 Nov;17(4):265-74.

Abstract

The effectiveness and side effects of three types of enema solutions were compared in healthy subjects. Using a repeated-measures, double-blind design, the three different enemas (soapsuds, tap water, and polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solution) were given at 1-week intervals to 24 healthy volunteers. Soapsuds and tap water enemas produced significantly greater returns than polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG-ES) and were also more uncomfortable. Rectal biopsies showed surface epithelium loss after soapsuds and tap water but not after PEG-ES enemas. Before recommending changes in nursing practice, further research is needed to determine the mechanism for the surface epithelium damage and to determine if this damage produces a stronger defecation stimulus and discomfort.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Abdominal Pain / chemically induced
  • Abdominal Pain / diagnosis
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Biopsy
  • Defecation / drug effects
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Electrolytes / adverse effects
  • Electrolytes / therapeutic use*
  • Enema / adverse effects
  • Enema / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Polyethylene Glycols / adverse effects
  • Polyethylene Glycols / therapeutic use*
  • Proctoscopy
  • Rectum / drug effects
  • Rectum / pathology
  • Safety*
  • Soaps / adverse effects
  • Soaps / therapeutic use*
  • Solutions
  • Surface-Active Agents / adverse effects
  • Surface-Active Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Water* / adverse effects

Substances

  • Electrolytes
  • Soaps
  • Solutions
  • Surface-Active Agents
  • Water
  • Polyethylene Glycols