RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Rome II and III diagnostic criteria for dyssynergic defecation recommended the exclusion of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This study determined the effect of biofeedback therapy on dyssynergic constipation in patients with or without IBS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a nonrandomized, single blinded, semi experimental study. Dyssynergic defecation patients with and without IBS were asked to undergo biofeedback therapy 8 sessions. The defecation dynamics and balloon expulsion time were evaluated before, at the end and 1 month after the biofeedback therapy. IBS symptoms were graded using a 4-point Likert scale. Mann-Whitney U-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman test were applied to analyze data using SPSS software package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: After the biofeedback therapy, the IBS symptoms have been decreased significantly (the median of 2 before and 1 after therapy, P < 0.01). The biofeedback therapy significantly decreased the anismus index in IBS group by the mean of 0.75 ± 0.31, 0.28 ± 0.07 and 0.28 ± 0.06 in three phases, respectively. Similar results were found in non-IBS patients (the mean of 0.74 ± 0.32, 0.28 ± 0.08, 0.27 ± 0.08 in three phases, respectively). The symptoms of constipation (sensation of incomplete evacuation, difficult and painful defecation), defecation facilitative manual maneuver frequency, pelvic floor muscles resting amplitude and strain amplitude decreased and squeezing amplitude improved significantly after biofeedback therapy in both groups with and without IBS (P < 0.001). There were not significant differences between patients with and without IBS (P > 0.05) with respect to outcome. No complication was observed in treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Dyssynergic constipation patients with and without IBS will likely benefit from biofeedback therapy.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate the attitude of interns toward Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) and design a PM&R curriculum for medical students with continued medical education programmes and workshops based on the needs and interest of Iranian medical community. METHOD: Eighty questionnaires were distributed to the medical interns on the last day after attendance in the PM&R ward after participating in a one-month outpatient and inpatient course including 12 lectures. RESULTS: Out of 80 participants, 34 (42.5%) were female and 46 (57.5%) were male. All the participants believed participating in a rehabilitation course was necessary; 52 (65%) believed that participating in a separate course of PM&R was necessary, and 28 (35%) believed that rehabilitation of each field of medicine should be presented in its course. A significant percentage (31.4%) of the participants were interested in continuing their education in PM&R specialty. CONCLUSION: The enthusiasm of the medical students towards PM&R is a promising sign toward progress of PM&R in Iran which must be directed through a strong effort of physiatrists through setting up appropriate educational programmes for medical students and continued medical education programme s in the universities.