Evaluating high dose laxatives via nasogastric tube versus enemas in children with severe constipation: a prospective cohort study
Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2025

Enema of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Patients with Severe Acute Pancreatitis
Published on: January 27, 2023
Marion A Meester-Soonius1, Brigitha W Nuijens2, Roy S Koendering2
1Department of Pediatrics, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands. m.meester@nwz.nl.
Insights
Both nasogastric laxatives and rectal enemas effectively treat severe constipation in children. While enemas may cause less pain, neither method showed a significant difference in overall effectiveness or burden.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Gastroenterology
- Clinical Effectiveness Research
Background:
- Severe constipation in children often necessitates disimpaction when standard treatments fail.
- Current practice guidelines for nurses lack clear directives for disimpaction procedures.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of nasogastric laxatives versus rectal enemas for disimpaction in children.
- To assess and compare the pain and burden associated with each treatment for children and parents.
Main Methods:
- A prospective cohort study involving 70 children (aged 0-18 years) with severe constipation.
- Participants received either rectal enemas (n=51) or nasogastric laxatives (n=19), with treatment choice made in consultation with healthcare providers and families.
- Effectiveness was measured by stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale 3-5) after eight weeks.
Main Results:
- Both treatments achieved high rates of effective stool consistency: 98% for enemas and 89% for nasogastric laxatives (p=0.177).
- Pain scores were numerically higher with nasogastric laxatives, but this difference was not statistically significant.
- No significant differences were observed in reported burden for children or parents; fecal incontinence rates were also not significantly different between groups.
Conclusions:
- Nasogastric laxatives and rectal enemas are both effective disimpaction methods for pediatric severe constipation.
- While enemas may offer a slight advantage in reducing pain and burden in younger children, this was not statistically significant.
- Further research is recommended on the impact of interprofessional collaboration and education on treatment compliance and admission rates.
Objectives:
Children with severe constipation often require disimpaction when standard treatments fail, typically involving high doses of oral laxatives or rectal enemas. Practice guidelines for nurses lack clear directives. This study compared the effectiveness of nasogastric laxatives versus rectal enemas in children aged 0-18 years and aimed to assess the pain and burden experienced by children and parents.
Methods:
A prospective cohort study was conducted between December 2018 and June 2022 at a Dutch pediatric outpatient clinic. Of 111 children with severe constipation, 70 participated: 51 (73%) received rectal enemas and 19 (27%) received nasogastric laxatives. Treatment choice was made by the pediatrician in consultation with the parents and, when possible, the child.
Results:
After eight weeks, 98% (50/51) of enema-treated children and 89% (17/19) of those receiving nasogastric laxatives achieved effective stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale 3-5), with no significant difference in overall effectiveness (p = 0.177). Pain scores were higher for children treated with nasogastric laxatives, but not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in the reported burden for children or parents. Fecal incontinence was lower in the enema group (33% vs. 47%) but not statistically different.
Conclusions:
Both nasogastric laxatives and rectal enemas were effective for disimpaction in children with severe constipation, with no significant difference in efficacy. Although enemas appeared to cause less pain and burden in children under twelve, this was not statistically significant. Further research is needed to address the effect of interprofessional approach and education on compliance and admission of this specific population.
Related Concept Videos
Enteral Nutrition I: Orogastric and Nasogartic Feeding
Orogastric (OG) and nasogastric (NG) feeding are two standard methods used for enteral nutrition. Enteral nutrition is often preferred over...
Enteral Nutrition II: Nasointestinal and Gastrostomy Feeding
Nasointestinal Feeding
Nasointestinal feeding involves placing a tube...
Lower GI Series: Barium Enema
Procedure Details
The examination begins by inserting a lubricated rectal tube into the patient's rectum to administer a radiopaque barium solution. The barium flow is carefully...
Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy
Sigmoidoscopy
Sigmoidoscopy is a diagnostic procedure that uses a flexible sigmoidoscope equipped with a light source and camera to examine the rectum and sigmoid colon. The procedure involves inserting the tube through the anus...
Drugs Affecting GI Tract Motility: Other Laxatives
Osmotic or saline laxatives, like magnesium hydroxide or milk of...
Drugs Affecting GI Tract Motility: Bulk-Forming and Stimulant Laxatives
Bulk-forming laxatives, such as psyllium, methylcellulose, and polycarbophil, absorb water in the intestine, increasing stool bulk and promoting bowel movement. This...

