Comparing Electronic Bidets and Warm Sitz Baths for Post-Hemorrhoidectomy Care
Author Information
Author(s): Kwon Yoon-Hye, Ryoo Seung-Bum, Oh Heung-Kwon, Lee Jae Bum, Jung Hyung-Joong, Song Kee-Ho, Heo Seung Chul, Shin Rumi, Lee Joongyub, Park Kyu Joo
Primary Institution: Seoul National University Hospital
Hypothesis
The electronic bidet would not be inferior to the sitz bath for alleviating anal pain after hemorrhoidectomy.
Conclusion
The anal pain scores did not differ between the electronic bidet and sitz bath groups, and the noninferiority of the electronic bidet was not verified.
Supporting Evidence
- The VAS score for anal pain did not differ significantly between the two groups.
- The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the VAS score in the electronic bidet group was higher than the margin of noninferiority.
- Both groups had similar wound healing rates at 4 weeks post-surgery.
- Patients reported the electronic bidet as more convenient for postoperative care.
Takeaway
This study looked at whether using an electronic bidet is as good as a warm sitz bath for helping people feel better after hemorrhoid surgery. It found that both methods worked similarly for pain relief.
Methodology
A randomized, controlled, single-blind, multicenter trial comparing the use of an electronic bidet and warm sitz baths for 7 days post-hemorrhoidectomy.
Potential Biases
Potential variability in surgical techniques due to multiple surgeons across different hospitals.
Limitations
The study had a small sample size and short-term follow-up, which limited the ability to identify all clinical effects.
Participant Demographics
Mean age was 50.85 years, with 48% male participants.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.453
Confidence Interval
95% CI upper limit: 81.22
Statistical Significance
p=0.453
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website