Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
The Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is defined by a combination of abdominal pain, bowel dysfunction during recurrent periods of shorter or longer duration. The absence of well-defined pathophysiological marker requires a clinical definition. The most used are the Rome criteria III whose version was published in 2006 and version IV under development.
An epidemiological study conducted in 2003 in Europe in 8 countries with over 42 000 people, found on the basis of questionnaires a prevalence of 11.5% with a diagnosis of IBS of 4.8%.in the total population; the results of this study were comparable to data obtained in the USA. A French work of our team at 35 447 healthy adults found a 6.2% frequency. In all these studies, there is a very large predominance of women (sex ratio near 2), with a preponderance of subjects of the age group 40-50 years.
IBS economic weight is high, partly due to costs directly incurred by the IBS and the costs generated by associated diseases: number of visits to the general practitioner, to the specialist, the prescription and realization of complementary examinations, hospitalization, purchase drugs and work stoppage.
From a pathophysiologic perspective, IBS is now considered as a multifactorial disease involving varying degrees, depending on the individual variables, visceral hypersensitivity, disturbances of digestive motility, impaired sensorimotor way communications between the gastrointestinal tract and the central nervous system, intestinal micro-inflammation.
Hypothesis of this search is that the osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) will improve the symptomatology of IBS in patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders.
Full description
The Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is defined by the association between abdominal pain, bowel dysfunction for longer or shorter periods of time, but in any case, recurring. The absence of well-defined pathophysiological marker, requires a clinical definition. The most used are the Rome criteria III whose version was published in 2006, Version IV is under development.
coordinator's team demonstrated in a randomized, placebo-controlled, 31 patients with refractory IBS, visceral osteopathy that is associated with a significant improvement in diarrhea, abdominal distension and abdominal pain without change constipation. This improvement was associated with a decrease in rectal sensitivity without changes of depression, time of total or segmental colonic transit. This effect persisted one year after the end of this essay.
Primary objective To evaluate the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment on IBS symptoms in IBS adult patients over a 3-sessions period according to our preliminary study (73).
Secondary objectives To evaluate and to compare the results of two therapeutic modalities : osteopathic manipulative treatment and placebo manipulative treatment on
Experimental design:
Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, parallel group multicenter French study of 3 OMT sessions followed by an 18-week follow-up period.
Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive osteopathic manipulative treatment or placebo manipulative treatment every 2 weeks with stratification according to the IBS phenotype (IBS-C, IBS-D, IBS-M, IBS-U).
Description of research methodology
Design Double blind randomized clinical trial with a distribution of subjects in groups at a ratio (1:1) It is a double blind, multicenter, comparative, prospective, two-arms randomized study.
The schedule will include 7 visits:
Efficacy assessment The main criteria for treatment efficacy are the value of the IBS severity score. The IBS severity score was established from the self-administered questionnaire developed and validated by Francis. The French version was validated by the MAPI Research Institute. This questionnaire includes two items concerning abdominal pain and abdominal bloating (yes/no) and four visual analog scales (1-100) to assess the severity of abdominal pain, bloating, relief after stool, and impact of symptoms on quality of life. The number of days the patient suffered during the last 10 days was also recorded. The responses were used to calculate a quantitative severity score from 0 to 500 used to make a qualitative classification: severity score 75-175 = mild, 175-300 = moderate, > 300 = severe.
This questionnaire will be registered 7 times, at inclusion (V0), during each osteopathic visit (V1, V2, V3) and each medical visit (V4, V5, V6):
Before treatment at (V0),
During visceral manipulative treatment (V1, V2, V3)
During the follow-up period, after visceral manipulative treatment (osteopathic or placebo),
Number of subjects chosen: 210 patients Sample Size Considering that the minimal clinical difference on the primary outcome measure that would lead clinicians to change the treatment is 50 points the IBS Symptom Severity Score, and that the standard deviation of this variable is 105 points, the sample size required to detect a difference at 90% power and 5% two-sided significance level is 94 patients/group .
To allow for loss to follow up around 10%, the total sample size of the trial would will be N=210 patients.
Number of centres 7 centres are included. Research period
Statistical analysis Descriptive Statistics
All study variables will be presented by treatment and overall, by using the appropriate descriptive statistics according to the variable nature, unless otherwise specified:
Primary efficacy endpoint Primary endpoint: Changes from baseline of IBSSS at V4, will be analyzed by mixed model of ANCOVA with patient as random factor. Baseline value of the score as well as variables a priori known to affect the score will be included in the model.
Secondary efficacy endpoints
Secondary efficacy variables with binary outcome (i.e. responder status) will be analysed using a Chi-square or Fisher's exact test in a 2 x 2 contingency table to compare active treatment group with placebo. A two-sided overall significance level of 5 % will be used.
Secondary efficacy variables with continuous variables (i.e. "change from baseline") will be evaluated through an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models with fixed effect terms for treatment group and the patient's corresponding baseline value of the parameter as a covariate. The rebound effect will be evaluated with pairwise t-test.
For the efficacy endpoints, the following subgroup-analyses will be presented:
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
157 participants in 2 patient groups, including a placebo group
Loading...
Central trial contact
Michel Bouchoucha, MD
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal