Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:1585039rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0038454lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0150156lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0013682lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0449243lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0038854lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1280519lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:issue3lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:dateCreated1992-6-18lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:abstractTextThis study was designed to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of four bowel training protocols for stroke patients (N = 46) differing in two variables: (a) consistent use of suppositories, and (b) time of day scheduled for the bowel training program. Eighty-five percent of the subjects (n = 39) achieved effective bowel training within 1 month. Patients assigned to morning bowel training groups were significantly more efficient than those in evening groups in establishing effective bowel regimens. No significant differences were found between scheduled versus prn suppository use. Efficiency was highest for those assigned to a bowel training group whose time coincided with their previous pattern and lowest for those assigned to a group whose time conflicted with a previous pattern.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:citationSubsetNlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:issn0278-4807lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TaftLLlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:authorpubmed-author:VennM RMRlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:authorpubmed-author:CarpentierBBlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:authorpubmed-author:ApplebaughGGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:volume17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:pagination116-20lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1585039-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:articleTitleThe influence of timing and suppository use on efficiency and effectiveness of bowel training after a stroke.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:publicationTypeClinical Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:publicationTypeRandomized Controlled Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1585039pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed