Introduction： Neurogenic bowel dysfunction is one of the most distressing consequences of the spinal cord injury. Transanal irrigation has proven to be a treatment for many such individuals, but there are some patien...Introduction： Neurogenic bowel dysfunction is one of the most distressing consequences of the spinal cord injury. Transanal irrigation has proven to be a treatment for many such individuals, but there are some patients with sub-optimal response to it. Our aim was to evaluate the satisfaction, safety, perception and compliance of a new transanal irrigation device, Navina Smart system featuring an electronically driven pump with a digital control. Material and methods： Twenty-eight patients who had previously used, or were currently using transanal irrigation were enrolled. They were trained to use the Navina Smart system and were thereafter treated for four weeks. Patient perception, compliance and level of satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at the end of treatment. Results： At the end of treatment 68% of patients were still using the system and 50% of ITT （intended to treat） wished to continue using the system. Navina Smart was well tolerated with no adverse effects in the cohort. Patient perception of the Navina Smart system was positive in 67%. Conclusions： Navina Smart system was shown to be safe, tolerable and effective in two-thirds of patients who were unsatisfied with their previous bowel care and was associated with an increase in the patient＇s independence.展开更多
文摘Introduction： Neurogenic bowel dysfunction is one of the most distressing consequences of the spinal cord injury. Transanal irrigation has proven to be a treatment for many such individuals, but there are some patients with sub-optimal response to it. Our aim was to evaluate the satisfaction, safety, perception and compliance of a new transanal irrigation device, Navina Smart system featuring an electronically driven pump with a digital control. Material and methods： Twenty-eight patients who had previously used, or were currently using transanal irrigation were enrolled. They were trained to use the Navina Smart system and were thereafter treated for four weeks. Patient perception, compliance and level of satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at the end of treatment. Results： At the end of treatment 68% of patients were still using the system and 50% of ITT （intended to treat） wished to continue using the system. Navina Smart was well tolerated with no adverse effects in the cohort. Patient perception of the Navina Smart system was positive in 67%. Conclusions： Navina Smart system was shown to be safe, tolerable and effective in two-thirds of patients who were unsatisfied with their previous bowel care and was associated with an increase in the patient＇s independence.
