To explore the effects of adaptive biofeedback training(ABF)on efficacy of clinical efficacy, psychological status and life quality in patients with outlet obstruction constipation (OOC).

From June 2011 to October 2014, a total of 206 patients with OOC were enrolled. They were divided into ABF group and fixed biofeedback training (FBF) group. The clinical symptoms integral, clinical efficacy, psychological status and quality of life were observed before and eight weeks after treatment. Chi-square test or t-test was performed for statistical analysis.

A total of 138 cases completed biofeedback training and were divided into ABF group (n=76) and FBF group (n=62). Before treatment, the total scores of clinical constipation symptoms of ABF and FBF groups were 10.95±2.86 and 11.20±2.23, respectively, which were 2.02±1.10 and 2.98±1.19 after treatment. The total scores of both groups decreased after treatment (t=2.60, 2.45; both P<0.05). After treatment, the difference value of total score of ABF group was 8.93±0.37, which was higher than that of FBF group (8.24±0.29), and the difference was statistically significant (t=2.53, P<0.05). The total effective rate of ABF group 94.7% (72/76) was significantly higher than that of FBF group (85.5%, 53/62), and the difference was statistically significant (χ²=3.426, P<0.05). After treatment, the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS) scores of ABF group were 37.7±9.1 and 41.4±7.4, respectively, which were significantly lower than those before treatment (48.2±11.7 and 50.7±9.6), and the differences were statistically significant (t=9.54 and 5.01, both P<0.05). The SAS and SDS scores of FBF group were 37.8±10.3 and 39.8±11.2 after treatment, which were significantly lower than those before treatment (49.1±9.9 and 53.1±9.6), and the differences were statistically significant (t=8.95 and 5.67, both P<0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in SAS and SDS scores between the two groups after treatment (both P>0.05). After treatment, the integral of each dimension of Chinese version of the MOS 36-item short form healtly survey (SF-36) in ABF group and FBF group were both higher than those before treatment, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the integral of each dimension of SF-36 between the two groups after treatment (all P>0.05).

Both ABF and FBF can effectively improve clinical symptoms, psychological health and the quality of life in patients with OOC. However, ABF seems to be more effective and superior and more advantages.

Constipation, outlet obstruction; Biofeedback, psychology; Treatment outcome; Quality of life