Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT05550675

Prospective Database of Factors Associated With Faecal vs. Double Incontinence in Patients Referred for High Resolution Anorectal Manometry.

This study aims to verify the results from our previous retrospective cohort analysis by establishing a database of well-characterised patients prospectively. The different prevalence of neurological disorders, abdominal, urological and obstetrical surgery, diarrhoea and other potential associated factors as well as the importance of abnormalities identified by 3D high resolution anorectal manometry (HARM) will be compared between subjects with feacal incontinence (FI), double incontinence (DI) and controls. Presence and severity of both FI and urinary incontinence (UI) will be evaluated by disease specific questionnaires. Measuring both disease severity and Quality of Life (QoL) is needed to determine the true impact of incontinence. Finally, the impact on quality of life will be compared between both groups.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

About this study

Double incontinence (DI) is the concomitant incontinence for urine and stool. A 3 - 5 % prevalence among adults has been reported, while 7 - 18 % of community-dwelling adults suffer from faecal incontinence (FI), irrespective of gender. Risk factors for FI include structural anomalies of the anorectal region, disturbed rectal compliance, disturbed anorectal sensation and presence of diarrhoea. Age, body mass index (BMI), obstetrical history (especially parity), anal penetrative intercourse and chronic illness have also been implicated. In contrast, little is known about the pathophysiology of DI. Factors like older age, multiparity, neurological disease and medical comorbidities have been proposed based on analysis from the Nurse's health study. According to our recent retrospective cohort analysis (accepted for publication Acta Gastro-Enterologica Belgica), diarrhoea, neurological disease and previous urological interventions characterise patients suffering from DI. Males most frequently suffer from an underlying neurologic disorder, while anatomical anomalies and urological surgery was more frequently observed in women. There was a trend toward more frequent diarrhoea in both genders. Anorectal manometry parameters could not differentiate between FI alone or DI. However, this result could have been hampered by the use of conventional manometry in contrast to high-resolution 3D manometry.

This study aims to verify the results from our previous retrospective cohort analysis by establishing a database of well-characterised patients prospectively. The different prevalence of neurological disorders, abdominal, urological and obstetrical surgery, diarrhoea and other potential associated factors as well as the importance of abnormalities identified by 3D high resolution anorectal manometry (HARM) will be compared between subjects with FI, DI and controls. Presence and severity of both FI and UI will be evaluated by disease specific questionnaires.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age > 18 years;
  • Self-reported faecal incontinence.

Exclusion criteria

  • Impossibility to perform the anorectal manometry because of pain, stenosis or organic disease;
  • Active (peri)rectal inflammation, including abscess;
  • Pregnancy;
  • Inability to cooperate during the anorectal manometry
  • Impossibility to perform HARM due to pain, stenosis or organic disease;
  • Inability to complete the questionnaires

Treatment and study plan

questionnaires

Other

Disease specific questionnaires

Primary outcomes

  1. compose a database of patients suffering from faecal or double incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    a database will be created

Secondary outcomes

  1. Confirm the role of diarrhea as a major determinant of double incontinence vs faecal incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using jorge and wexner score

  2. Confirm the role of diarrhea as a major determinant of double incontinence vs faecal incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using vaizey score

  3. Confirm the role of diarrhea as a major determinant of double incontinence vs faecal incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using International consultation on incontinence questionnaire

  4. Confirm the role of diarrhea as a major determinant of double incontinence vs faecal incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using clinical frailty score

  5. Confirm the role of diarrhea as a major determinant of double incontinence vs faecal incontinence

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using bristol stool scale

  6. Identify other factors associated with DI vs. FI ,

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using bristol stool scale

  7. Identify other factors associated with DI vs. FI ,

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using clinical frailty score

  8. Identify other factors associated with DI vs. FI ,

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using jorge and wexner score

  9. Identify other factors associated with DI vs. FI ,

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using vaizey score

  10. Identify other factors associated with DI vs. FI ,

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using International consultation on incontinence questionnaire

  11. Compare manometric data from HARM in DI vs. FI alone;

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using HARM

  12. Assess the prevalence of DI in women and men with FI presenting for HARM;

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using HARM

  13. Investigate the impact of UI on the quality of life in DI vs. FI alone.

    Time frame: during inclusion visit

    this outcome will be assessed using the Quality of Life questionnaire (faecal incontinence Quality of Life scale)

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Magali Surmont

CONTACT

[email protected]

+32 2 477 60 11

Virgini Van Buggenhout

CONTACT

[email protected]

+32 2 477 60 11

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2022
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2030
First posted
Sep 22, 2022
Registry last updated
Dec 18, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.