Effects of Probiotics on Ulcerative Colitis - Research Paper Example

Introduction The two articles to be analyzed are well related to the problem of using probiotics for ulcerative colitis (UC) and its effect in terms of different interventions caused by definite disorders. The problem of UC is of high importance for contemporary gastroenterologists. It is widely stated that the treatment of UC should be tested in different settings and according to different theoretical as well as practical approaches. Summary The study reported by Laake, et al. (2005) is devoted to the attempt of the researchers to continue on testing probiotics in their use for patients operated on IPAA and those with FAP and IRA. The methodology presupposes the group of patients divided in their relation to previously diagnosed with relevant diseases along with UC. Thus, the main conclusion is that there should be an increased response to probiotics in the familial treatment where the risk for UC is too high. The article by Tsuda, et al. (2007) is the study on the general use of BIO-THREE tablets for patients with UC. In this respect a balanced scorecard has been applied to resemble on the effect from using probiotics while approaching T-RFLP method. The findings have shown the need for administration of BIO-THREE tablets in the future assesment of the medications for the UC patients. Critical analysis of the articles The basic question being asked in the article by Laake, et al. (2005) is to measure endoscopic estimation along with faecal flora and clinical symptoms in relation with ileal-pouch-anal-anastomosis (IPAA) and UC for patients. On the other hand, the study reported by Tsuda, et al. (2007) examines the effectiveness of probiotics for treating distal UC in terms of conventional therapies. The theoretical approach in both articles conforms to the academic innovations at the time. However, the research by Laake, et al. (2005) is a continuation of the previous study by the authors on the use of probiotics for IPAA patients and the manifestations of UC on them. The study by Tsuda, et al. (2007) is an attempt of the authors to keep track to the efficacy of the use of probiotics in UC. The literature review is the main source for both articles in terms of gastroenterological findings done previously. Thus, the literature review in Laake, et al. (2005) is properly divided in the studies done during three decades (1980s. 1990s, 2000s) with overall idea of their mutual relation to the topic. Conversely, Tsuda, et al. (2007) keeps an eye open to the most recent studies in the topic so as to make sure that the recent interest in the use of probiotics is well appreciated today. The issue of research design is a bit awkward in comparison of two studies and in close relation to the effectiveness of probiotics on UC. It is all about the identical standpoints for the research due to the same journal where the articles were published. Thus, the research design of both articles complies with the standards of the international scientific community in terms of the main steps conducted during the researches. Needless to say, both studies are too scientific in their fundamentals. Both articles are addressed to the close community of medical workers with the academic body of knowledge in gastroenterology. It also states the necessity of coping with the specific academic glossary which is full of highly scientific terms and abbreviations as well. Hence, the main fundamentals of UC in its relation to probiotics implemented in different states of disorders outlined in the articles are well determined. As to the ethical issues addressed in the studies, it is vital to note that in Laake, et al. (2005) it is more relevant and appropriate to the specific needs of tested patients. They used diary cards and accurate interviews before during and after the intervention. By contrast, in Tsuda, et al. (2007), there is an obscure picture of how ethically the research on the patients was applied and whether or not each of the tested patients was well informed on the overall aim of the study. The key findings in Laake, et al. (2005) are that the use of probiotics in UC among patients operated on IPPA has improved according to the previous hypothesis by the researchers. It has a suggestion that further clinical symptoms and endoscopic scores should be deeper analyzed in the relevant studies. Tsuda, et al. (2007) proved the use of BIO-THREE tablets as safe and effective means for patients with UC in their need to cure it faster and with less threats to their health. Examination of the usefulness of the articles The key concepts in both studies can be divided respectively. Laake, et al. (2005) go in theory research around the concepts of IPPA, familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), lactobacilli (La-5) and bifidobacteriae (Bb-12), and ileorectal anastomosis (IRA). These concepts are clearly defined throughout the study. In the study by Tsuda, et al. (2007), the key concepts clearly defined and implemented throughout the study as follows: ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI), BIO-THREE, terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP). The main hypotheses posed in the studies are both concerned with the efficacious impact of probiotics on treating UC. Nevertheless, Laake, et al. (2005) are inclined to test “clinical symptoms, faecal flora and endoscopic evaluation, and to compare the results in UC/IPAA patients with those of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) with IPAA and UC patients with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA)” (p. 43). Conversely, the study by Tsuda, et al. (2007) aims at “evaluating “the efficacy of probiotics therapy for mild to moderate distal UC refractory to conventional therapies” (p. 1306). The independent variables used and applied to in both studies are: lactobacilli (La-5) and bifidobacteriae (Bb-12) and BIO-THREE tablets respectively. On the other side, the dependent variables used in both studies are: UC/IPAA patients with FAP and with IRA and UCDAI along with T-RFLP accordingly. Notably, the measurements done in both studies are all of quantitative character. In this vein, researchers in both articles delved more in the quantitative relevance of the key variables in terms of the selected patients. Laake, et al. (2005) keeps track to the qualitative measurement in cases when additional approval of probiotics is needed. By contrast, the feasibility of measurements done in Tsuda, et al. (2007) goes without saying due to accurate calculations and applications of different scores to prove them right. All in all, the measurements set in both articles highlight the accuracy in quantitative and qualitative implications in each one. The units of analysis go hand in hand with the overall design of research set in both articles. It is all about the need of theoretical and practical approaches along with the methodological key points, results, and conclusion/discussion. To make it plain, patient stories of disease were taken on probation for a definite (long-term) period in Laake, et al. (2005). On the other hand, Tsuda, et al. (2007) uses the same period of 4 weeks to test the scores taken for patients with UC. All in all, the results are coordinate with the remedies and periods chosen beforehand. All causal relationships seen in accordance with the hypotheses in each article have been successfully established. In this respect the researchers in both articles paid great attention to the issue of UC treatment from different angles on the problem but triggered by the earlier studies on the topic. This is why all causal relationships are done in direct ratio and in accordance with the firsthand assumptions of the researchers in their attempt to prove their hypotheses right. The sampling done in each article seems pretty representative and well-polished. All patients chosen for the experiment have shown good results in their urge for keeping track to the effectiveness of each treatment with the help of probiotics. Response rates are one hundred per cent successful and complete in each research. It makes an observer believe in the concreteness and feasibility of the findings managed in each study. Thus, sampling plus response rate are well determined touching upon the efficacy in results and omitting inaccurate calculations in findings as well. Definitely, context matters to the causal relationships. The administration of probiotics (lactobacilli (La-5) and bifidobacteriae (Bb-12) and BIO-THREE tablets) has shown positive effect in strict accordance with the dose and periods of using them for patients with UC on different stage of deterioration. To say more, the logic of the overall research presupposing the need for probiotics would fail if not keeping up with causal relationship. It is a so-called guarantee for valid measurements serving for feasible outcomes thereafter. Thus, the whole design of the articles is testable and full of useful information to be applied for further studies on the topic. Conclusion Therefore, the two articles have shown a reputable set of findings on the effective administration of probiotics while treating UC. Each research adds to the overall picture of gastroenterological investigation while taking close look at the problem of more improvements for patients characterized by deteriorations (IPAA, FAP, and IRA) as well as for patients with UC in terms of general medical practice. In this respect probiotics (La-5, Bd-12 and BIO-THREE) have shown their efficacy. Reference Laake, K. O., BJØRNEKLETT, A., AAMODT, G., AABAKKEN, L., JACOBSEN, M., BAKKA, A., et al. (2005). Outcome of four weeks’ intervention with probiotics on symptoms and endoscopic appearance after surgical reconstruction with a J-configurated ileal-pouch-anal-anastomosis in ulcerative colitis. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology , 40, 43-51. Tsuda, Y., YOSHIMATSU, Y., AOKI, H., NAKAMURA, K., IRIE, M., FUKUDA, K., et al. (2007). Clinical effectiveness of probiotics therapy (BIO-THREE) in patients with ulcerative colitis refractory to conventional therapy. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology , 42, 1306-1311. Read More