The Monitoring Efficacy of Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction Treatment on Response (MENTOR) in a Non-Hospital Setting.
MENTOR
NBD
SCI
constipation
fecal incontinence
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Jan 2021
12 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
22
12
2020
revised:
05
01
2021
accepted:
07
01
2021
entrez:
15
1
2021
pubmed:
16
1
2021
medline:
16
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Most patients with a spinal cord injury (SCI) suffer from neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD). In spite of well-established treatment algorithms, NBD is often insufficiently managed. The Monitoring Efficacy of Neurogenic bowel dysfunction Treatment On Response (MENTOR) has been validated in a hospital setting as a tool to support clinical decision making in individual patients. The objective of the present study was to describe clinical decisions recommended by the MENTOR (either "monitor", "discuss" or "act") and the use of the tool to monitor NBD in a non-hospital setting. A questionnaire describing background data, the MENTOR, ability to work and participation in various social activities was sent by mail to all members of The Danish Paraplegic Association. Among 1316 members, 716 (54%) responded, 429 men (61%) and 278 women (39%), aged 18 to 92 (median 61) years. Based on MENTOR, the recommended clinical decision is to monitor treatment of NBD in 281 (44%), discuss change in treatment in 175 (27%) and act/change treatment in 181 (28%). A recommendation to discuss or change treatment was associated with increasing age of the respondent ( A surprisingly high proportion of persons with SCI have an unmet need for improved bowel care. The MENTOR holds promise as a tool for evaluation of treatment of NBD in a non-hospital setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Most patients with a spinal cord injury (SCI) suffer from neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD). In spite of well-established treatment algorithms, NBD is often insufficiently managed. The Monitoring Efficacy of Neurogenic bowel dysfunction Treatment On Response (MENTOR) has been validated in a hospital setting as a tool to support clinical decision making in individual patients. The objective of the present study was to describe clinical decisions recommended by the MENTOR (either "monitor", "discuss" or "act") and the use of the tool to monitor NBD in a non-hospital setting.
METHODS
METHODS
A questionnaire describing background data, the MENTOR, ability to work and participation in various social activities was sent by mail to all members of The Danish Paraplegic Association.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among 1316 members, 716 (54%) responded, 429 men (61%) and 278 women (39%), aged 18 to 92 (median 61) years. Based on MENTOR, the recommended clinical decision is to monitor treatment of NBD in 281 (44%), discuss change in treatment in 175 (27%) and act/change treatment in 181 (28%). A recommendation to discuss or change treatment was associated with increasing age of the respondent (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A surprisingly high proportion of persons with SCI have an unmet need for improved bowel care. The MENTOR holds promise as a tool for evaluation of treatment of NBD in a non-hospital setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33445668
pii: jcm10020263
doi: 10.3390/jcm10020263
pmc: PMC7828108
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Coloplast
ID : 5800 DKK
Références
Dis Colon Rectum. 1997 Oct;40(10):1233-9
pubmed: 9336119
Spinal Cord. 2014 Jun;52(6):494-8
pubmed: 24777164
Acta Neurol Scand. 2012 Feb;125(2):123-8
pubmed: 21428967
Dis Colon Rectum. 2002 May;45(5):641-9
pubmed: 12004214
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992 Jun;73(6):558-63
pubmed: 1622305
Spinal Cord. 2013 Oct;51(10):732-8
pubmed: 23958927
J Spinal Cord Med. 2020 Mar;43(2):141-164
pubmed: 32105586
J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2012 Mar;21(1):75-82
pubmed: 22457863
Spinal Cord. 2013 Sep;51(9):683-7
pubmed: 23774126
Spinal Cord. 2011 Apr;49(4):549-53
pubmed: 21102573
Spinal Cord. 2010 Oct;48(10):718-33
pubmed: 20212501
Spinal Cord. 2006 Oct;44(10):625-31
pubmed: 16344850
Prog Urol. 2016 Sep;26(10):553-7
pubmed: 27449575
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 24;11(8):e0159394
pubmed: 27557052
Spinal Cord. 2017 Dec;55(12):1084-1087
pubmed: 28695900
Spinal Cord. 2017 Aug;55(8):769-773
pubmed: 28290468
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Jan;96(1):49-55
pubmed: 25172370
J Neurotrauma. 2018 May 1;35(9):1091-1105
pubmed: 29239268
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2003 Feb;15(1):25-31
pubmed: 12588466
Spinal Cord. 2008 Mar;46(3):234-8
pubmed: 17893697
Gastroenterology. 2006 Sep;131(3):738-47
pubmed: 16952543
Spinal Cord. 2017 Jul;55(7):692-698
pubmed: 28195229
Spinal Cord. 2009 Apr;47(4):323-30; quiz 331-3
pubmed: 19015665
Rehabil Nurs. 2012 May-Jun;37(3):128-35
pubmed: 22549630
Clin Rehabil. 2010 Jun;24(6):483-8
pubmed: 20511302
Spinal Cord. 2020 Jul;58(7):795-802
pubmed: 31988365
Lancet. 1996 Jun 15;347(9016):1651-3
pubmed: 8642958
Spinal Cord. 2009 Jan;47(1):36-43
pubmed: 18957962
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 18;(12):CD002115
pubmed: 24347087
PM R. 2015 Apr;7(4):407-16
pubmed: 25305370