Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Jan 28, 2013; 19(4): 561-568
Published online Jan 28, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i4.561
Published online Jan 28, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i4.561
Table 1 Residual stool and fluid score in the three groups n (%)
Group | Residual stool stool and fluid score | mean ± SD | |||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
Residual stool stool | |||||
Study group A | 66 (50.0) | 21 (17.5) | 5 (4.2) | 28 (23.3) | 1.96 ± 0.11 |
Study group B | 68 (56.7) | 15 (12.5) | 5 (4.2) | 32 (26.6) | 2.01 ± 0.12 |
Control group | 37 (30.8) | 15 (12.5) | 23 (19.2) | 45 (37.5) | 2.63 ± 0.12 |
Residual fluid score | |||||
Study group A | 67 (55.9) | 46 (38.3) | 7 (5.8) | 0 (0.0) | 1.50 ± 0.06 |
Study group B | 66 (55.0) | 45 (37.5) | 8 (6.7) | 1 (0.8) | 1.53 ± 0.06 |
Control group | 58 (48.4) | 37 (30.8) | 18 (15.0) | 7 (5.8) | 1.78 ± 0.08 |
- Citation: Chen ZY, Shen HS, Luo MY, Duan CJ, Cai WL, Lu HB, Zhang GP, Liu Y, Liang JZ. Pilot study on efficacy of reduced cathartic bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol and bisacodyl. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19(4): 561-568
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v19/i4/561.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i4.561