Post-repair laxative management in obstetric anal sphincter injury guidelines: A narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Childbirth is a common factor which increases the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). Damage to the anal sphincters increases the risk of anal incontinence, which has a debilitating impact on the quality of life. Post-repair laxatives are prescribed in this group of women. However, there is no consensus regarding the type or frequency with which they are used, and available guidelines lack consistency and evidence to support the recommendations. AIM: The aim was to review and compare the international, national and local Australian management guidelines for recommendations regarding laxative use in women after OASIS. METHOD: An online literature search of medical and nursing databases such as PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane was performed between January 2000 and October 2020. Full-text articles with MeSH headings and Text Words [TW] identified guidelines in the prevention, management and care of OASIS. The search terms included 'obstetric anal sphincter injury', 'OASIS', 'perineal tear', 'postpartum continence', 'bowel injury', 'aperient', 'laxative use' and 'bulking agents'. RESULTS: Thirteen guidelines were included. Laxatives were recommended in most guidelines; however, there was a lack of consistency regarding the type of laxative used, frequency, dose and duration of use. Guidelines were based on historical evidence, with paucity of recently acquired data identified. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus regarding an optimal laxative regime for women who sustain an anal sphincter injury after childbirth. Further research is required to develop evidence-based robust clinical guidelines regarding laxative use in women who sustain OASIS.

Are we using best practice to guide laxative use in post-partum patients with obstetric anal sphincter injuries - A retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE: Obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is the leading cause of anal incontinence (AI) in young women. Laxatives are recommended to enhance recovery, however there are no consistent guidelines to guide best practice on the type, frequency, and dose of laxative should be used. This study aimed to evaluate the current use of laxatives following repair of OASIs, and to determine any association with AI. Study design A retrospective cohort study of 356 women who sustained OASIs between January 2016 and June 2020, at a single tertiary centre in Adelaide. Data regarding the type, dose and frequency of laxatives prescribed was extracted from each patient. The degree of OASIs was determined by clinical examination and endoanal ultrasound, and AI was measured by the St Marks incontinence score. RESULTS: Multiple combinations and classes of laxatives were prescribed including bulking agent (Metamucil and Fybogel), emollients (Coloxyl), and osmotic laxatives (lactulose and Movicol). Bulking agents were prescribed for 245 women (68.8%), which is contrary to the current recommendations based on two previous randomised controlled trials. AI reported by 51 (14.3%) women. There were no statistical differences between AI and laxative type, dose, or frequency. CONCLUSION: Considerable variation existed in laxatives prescription. Bulking agents was not associated with higher rates of AI. Further research is required to improve post-partum care in women following repair of OASIs.

Rethinking Docusate's Role in Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Critical Analysis of the Evidence.

Opioid induced constipation (OIC) is a predictable and preventable adverse effect of opioid use. Docusate is often utilized for OIC prophylaxis and treatment because of its low cost, easy accessibility and tolerability. However, the costs of docusate use may not outweigh the benefits given limited reported efficacy. The authors seek to provide the first critical review of clinical evidence for docusate use in OIC management. PubMed, Google Scholar, OVID Medline, and EMBASE were queried for primary literature, guidelines, and consensus recommendations (CR) evaluating docusate use for OIC management. Thirteen guidelines or CR and four primary literature studies were evaluated. The primary literature studies had significant design limitations and collectively revealed non-compelling evidence for use. The majority of guidelines or CR that endorsed the use of docusate for OIC prophylaxis or treatment did not cite primary evidence to support their recommendations. The inclusion of docusate in major guidelines and CR for OIC management is weakly evidence based, though docusate use is still widely recommended. Institutions and health care providers should consider careful evaluation of OIC protocols and/or algorithms to ensure integration of evidence-based therapy and reduce unnecessary drug use and associated costs, which may include removal of docusate.