Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVES: c.f.u. per day) for the relief of abdominal discomfort and bloating in a non-patient population. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study with a 2-week placebo run-in phase followed by a 4-week intervention phase was conducted at ten clinical centers (USA). Subjects were recruited from the general population by advertisement. The study randomized 302 subjects who experienced abdominal discomfort and bloating ≥2-times per week for at least three months but have not seen a physician or received prescribed medication for their symptoms in the past 12 months. Subjects were assessed for pre- to post-intervention changes in symptom severity (on a 6-point Likert scale; 0=none, 5=very severe) and frequency (symptoms-free days). RESULTS: A total of 275 subjects (mean age 42 years, 79% female, 74% Caucasian) provided evaluable data. Overall mean severity scores at baseline were 2.4 for abdominal discomfort and 2.5 for bloating with no significant differences between the placebo and probiotic groups. Both groups showed significant (P0.3). The frequency of abdominal bloating-free days was greater in the B. infantis 35624 group compared to the placebo group (P<0.05). Both regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous clinical studies in patients with IBS, B. infantis 35624 did not show a significant improvement in the mean severity of symptoms of abdominal discomfort and bloating in a non-patient population. This may be explained by the high placebo effect and the lower impact of functional bowel symptoms in the non-patient population.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Tamar Ringel‐Kulka
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Johnson W. McRorie
Yehuda Ringel
Meir Medical Center
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Rabin Medical Center
Procter & Gamble (United States)
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ringel‐Kulka et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1b95a8237e31891342f786 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2016.511
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: