Randomised clinical trial: Dried plums (prunes) vs. psyllium for constipation

A. Attaluri, R. Donahoe, J. Valestin, K. Brown, S. S.C. Rao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

71 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Treatment of chronic constipation remains challenging with 50% of patients dissatisfied with current therapy. There is an unmet need for natural and safe alternatives. Dried plums (prunes) have been used traditionally for constipation but their efficacy is not known. Aim To assess and compare the effects of dried plums and psyllium in patients with chronic constipation. Methods Subjects were enrolled in an 8-week, single-blind, randomised cross-over study. Subjects received either dried plums (50 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) or psyllium (11 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) for 3 weeks each, in a crossover trial with a 1-week washout period. Subjects maintained a daily symptom and stool diary. Assessments included number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week, global relief of constipation, stool consistency, straining, tolerability and taste. Results Forty constipated subjects (m/f = 3/37, mean age = 38 years) participated. The number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week (primary outcome measure) and stool consistency scores improved significantly (P < 0.05) with dried plums when compared to psyllium. Straining and global constipation symptoms did not differ significantly between treatments (P = N.S.). Dried plums and psyllium were rated as equally palatable and both were safe and well tolerated. Conclusion Dried plums are safe, palatable and more effective than psyllium for the treatment of mild to moderate constipation, and should be considered as a first line therapy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)822-828
Number of pages7
JournalAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Volume33
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2011

Fingerprint

Psyllium
Constipation
Randomized Controlled Trials
Cross-Over Studies
Therapeutics
Prunus domestica
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hepatology
  • Gastroenterology
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Randomised clinical trial : Dried plums (prunes) vs. psyllium for constipation. / Attaluri, A.; Donahoe, R.; Valestin, J.; Brown, K.; Rao, S. S.C.

In: Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vol. 33, No. 7, 01.04.2011, p. 822-828.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Attaluri, A. ; Donahoe, R. ; Valestin, J. ; Brown, K. ; Rao, S. S.C. / Randomised clinical trial : Dried plums (prunes) vs. psyllium for constipation. In: Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2011 ; Vol. 33, No. 7. pp. 822-828.
@article{68cde4e7d51f4118938f9a6d1319a760,
title = "Randomised clinical trial: Dried plums (prunes) vs. psyllium for constipation",
abstract = "Background Treatment of chronic constipation remains challenging with 50{\%} of patients dissatisfied with current therapy. There is an unmet need for natural and safe alternatives. Dried plums (prunes) have been used traditionally for constipation but their efficacy is not known. Aim To assess and compare the effects of dried plums and psyllium in patients with chronic constipation. Methods Subjects were enrolled in an 8-week, single-blind, randomised cross-over study. Subjects received either dried plums (50 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) or psyllium (11 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) for 3 weeks each, in a crossover trial with a 1-week washout period. Subjects maintained a daily symptom and stool diary. Assessments included number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week, global relief of constipation, stool consistency, straining, tolerability and taste. Results Forty constipated subjects (m/f = 3/37, mean age = 38 years) participated. The number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week (primary outcome measure) and stool consistency scores improved significantly (P < 0.05) with dried plums when compared to psyllium. Straining and global constipation symptoms did not differ significantly between treatments (P = N.S.). Dried plums and psyllium were rated as equally palatable and both were safe and well tolerated. Conclusion Dried plums are safe, palatable and more effective than psyllium for the treatment of mild to moderate constipation, and should be considered as a first line therapy.",
author = "A. Attaluri and R. Donahoe and J. Valestin and K. Brown and Rao, {S. S.C.}",
year = "2011",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04594.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "822--828",
journal = "Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics",
issn = "0269-2813",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomised clinical trial

T2 - Dried plums (prunes) vs. psyllium for constipation

AU - Attaluri, A.

AU - Donahoe, R.

AU - Valestin, J.

AU - Brown, K.

AU - Rao, S. S.C.

PY - 2011/4/1

Y1 - 2011/4/1

N2 - Background Treatment of chronic constipation remains challenging with 50% of patients dissatisfied with current therapy. There is an unmet need for natural and safe alternatives. Dried plums (prunes) have been used traditionally for constipation but their efficacy is not known. Aim To assess and compare the effects of dried plums and psyllium in patients with chronic constipation. Methods Subjects were enrolled in an 8-week, single-blind, randomised cross-over study. Subjects received either dried plums (50 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) or psyllium (11 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) for 3 weeks each, in a crossover trial with a 1-week washout period. Subjects maintained a daily symptom and stool diary. Assessments included number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week, global relief of constipation, stool consistency, straining, tolerability and taste. Results Forty constipated subjects (m/f = 3/37, mean age = 38 years) participated. The number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week (primary outcome measure) and stool consistency scores improved significantly (P < 0.05) with dried plums when compared to psyllium. Straining and global constipation symptoms did not differ significantly between treatments (P = N.S.). Dried plums and psyllium were rated as equally palatable and both were safe and well tolerated. Conclusion Dried plums are safe, palatable and more effective than psyllium for the treatment of mild to moderate constipation, and should be considered as a first line therapy.

AB - Background Treatment of chronic constipation remains challenging with 50% of patients dissatisfied with current therapy. There is an unmet need for natural and safe alternatives. Dried plums (prunes) have been used traditionally for constipation but their efficacy is not known. Aim To assess and compare the effects of dried plums and psyllium in patients with chronic constipation. Methods Subjects were enrolled in an 8-week, single-blind, randomised cross-over study. Subjects received either dried plums (50 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) or psyllium (11 g b.d., fibre = 6 gm/day) for 3 weeks each, in a crossover trial with a 1-week washout period. Subjects maintained a daily symptom and stool diary. Assessments included number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week, global relief of constipation, stool consistency, straining, tolerability and taste. Results Forty constipated subjects (m/f = 3/37, mean age = 38 years) participated. The number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week (primary outcome measure) and stool consistency scores improved significantly (P < 0.05) with dried plums when compared to psyllium. Straining and global constipation symptoms did not differ significantly between treatments (P = N.S.). Dried plums and psyllium were rated as equally palatable and both were safe and well tolerated. Conclusion Dried plums are safe, palatable and more effective than psyllium for the treatment of mild to moderate constipation, and should be considered as a first line therapy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952263984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952263984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04594.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04594.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21323688

AN - SCOPUS:79952263984

VL - 33

SP - 822

EP - 828

JO - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

JF - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

SN - 0269-2813

IS - 7

ER -