Applied Nursing Research
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 265-274, November 2004

Safety and effectiveness of large-volume enema solutions☆

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.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 12.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆ Supported by a grant (#1 R15 NR004867-01) from the National Institute of Nursing Research, Marilee Schmelzer (PI). C.B. Fleets, Inc. donated enema bags and Braintree Laboratories donated NuLYTELY, the polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution.

PII: S0897-1897(04)00080-1

doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2004.09.010

Applied Nursing Research
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 265-274, November 2004

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution