Product test Windi
A rectal catheter specifically developed for treatment of colic and other gas related symtoms in infants.
Windi is a rectal catheter developed specifically for use on infants to remove gas causing abdominal pain. Being the first product of its kind it is the only safe product for evacuation och gas in infants available on the market. It is actually the first product developed specifically for this indication at all.
After having massaged the baby’s abdomen to move the gas downwards, Windi is inserted into the baby’s rectal opening and through the rectal sphincter, which is often in cramp. The product is then moved around in order to stimulate the intestines and remove the gas. The product has a small central hole for gas and a greater coaxial hole to take care of possible faeces. A natural stop prevents the product from being inserted too far, and a hydrophilic surface minimizes the friction that it causes against the intestinal wall. This makes the product completely safe.
To evaluate the product’s efficiency as well as the number of products consumed, a number of products have been tested at the local childhealthcare centre in Mölndal, Sweden. A total of 20 babies with frequent abdominal pain and discomfort have tried the product. Nine of the infants were considered to suffer from infant colic, while nine of them suffered from other problems causing gas. Two of the babies suffered from constipation.
When the questionnaire was returned the problems had lasted for between two and ten weeks, with an average of 34 days. During this period an average between one and two products were consumed per day. The product helped on 71 percent of all occasions, with an average of between two and three tries needed to get the wanted results. In average those babies suffering from colic were in need both of a larger number of products per day and of a greater number of tries to get the wanted effect. The products efficiency was also slightly lower when used on the babies suffering from colic. Despite the fact that the test was conducted on relatively small number of babies, it clearly indicates that the product efficiently evacuates gas in infants and thereby alleviates gas-related pain and discomfort.
The main objective of the test was to evaluate the function and efficiency of the product. To appreciate the number of products consumed and thereby be able to make a prognosis and plan the coming launch, we also wanted to get an indication of the length of the problem period and the number of products consumed during this period. Finally, we wanted to see what differences exists, regarding the above mentioned factors, between colicky infants and infants suffering from other gas-related problems or constipation.
The product was tested of a total of 20 babies suffering from abdominal pain. At the healthcare centre the mothers were instructed on how to use the product. Together with a written instruction they were given five products to try at home and a questionnaire to fill in and return to the childcarehealth centre. The questionnaire included questions concerning the type of problem, the length of the period with problems, the number of products used per day and the efficiency of the product (the success rate when using the product and the number of tries needed to get the wanted result). If the product did not work the questionnaire was to be returned when the five products had been consumed. However this never happened. If it worked the mother returned and received more products. She was then able to use the product for as long as the problem lasted, after which the questionnaire was filled in and returned.
The results is here accounted for in according to the structure of the questionnaire.
Type of problem
Under question 1 the mother has stated the type of the problem her infant suffered from, the alternatives being colic, constipation and gas. Nine of the parents stated that their baby suffered from gas caused by colic, while the same number of parents stated that their baby suffered from other gas related problems not classed as colic. One of the latter suffered from a combination of gas and constipation.
Length of the problem period
The second question treats the length of the problem period. When the questionnaire was returned the problems had lasted for between two and ten weeks, with an average of about 34 days. The problem period was approximately the same for the colicky babies as for those suffering from other gas-related problems (33,6 days compared to 32,8 days). For the baby who suffered from constipation the problems lasted for 16 days and ten weeks respectively.
Frequency of use
Under question 3 the parents have stated the number of products used per day. Only three parents used less than one product a day and none of these classed the problems as colic. 16 of the parents used between one and two products a day. Only one mother used more than three products a day. In average between one and two products a day were needed. The average was slightly higher for the colicky babies (1,7products per day ) than for those with gas related problems of a less serious nature (1,2 products a day). For the baby suffering solely from constipation there was a need of one to two products a day.
The efficiency of the product
The fourth question treats the efficiency of the product. For six of the babies the product helped on each occasion. For the 14 remaining babies the catheter helped on some occasions. In average Windi worked on 71 percent of all occasions. The average for the babies with colic was 68 percent, compared to 77 percent for those babies suffering from other gas related problems. For the two babies suffering solely from constipation the product worked at 20 and 100 percent of the occasions respectively.
Number of tries needed
The fifth question deals with the number of tries needed to reach the wanted result. In 11 of the cases between one and two tries were enough to get the wanted effect. For the nine remaining babies between three and four tries were needed. No baby needed more than five tries to get the wanted results. The number of tries was higher for the babies suffering from infant colic than for those who suffered from gas but were not classes as colicky (2,5 tries compared to 1,9 tries).
According to the test the average problem period lasts for approximately 334 days. Howere, this result is uncertain, as in some cases the treatment may have been terminated before the problems were actually gone. This due to a lack of product at the childhealthcare centre at the end of the test period. It is therefore possible that, for some babies, the actual period was longer than what has been stated in the questionnaire. The problem period was only slightly longer for the babies who had colic than for those with other gas problems (33,6 compared to 32,8 days). As the test was relatively small in scope, however, it is difficult to draw any certain conclusions from these figures. For the two babies who suffered from constipation the problems lasted for 16 days and 10 weeks respectively.
In average between one and two products a day were needed during the problem period. The average consumption was slightly higher for the colicky babies than for those with other gas-related (1,7 compared to 1,2). Between one and two products a day were needed also for the two babies suffering from constipation.
This test shows that the products efficiency is high for both colicky babies and other babies with gas related problem, even if it was slightly higher for the babies who did not have colic. In total Windi worked on 71 percent of all occasions. The share was 68 percent for the babies who had colic compared to 77 percent for those with other gas related problems. For the two babies with constipation the product worked on 20 and 100 percent of the occasions respectively.
For the colicky babies a greater number of tries were also needed to reach the wanted result. In total an average of between two and three tries were needed. Taken in isolation 2,5 tries in average was needed for the colicky babies compared to 1,9 tries for the babies with other gas related problems. Probably both success rate when using Windi and the number of tries needed to succeed stand in direct correlation to the time and effort invested in massaging the baby’s abdomen before use.
The product has still been tested on a relatively small number of infants, and the result may therefore be seen as an indication. However, it very clearly indicates that Windi is efficient in alleviating discomfort and pain caused by gas, both in infants with colic and in those suffering from other gas related problems. The consumption was somewhat lower for the babies with colic. The efficiency was also somewhat lower for the babies with colic at the same time as a slightly larger number of tries were needed. This was expected the babies with colic were those with the most serious problems. Is it therefor natural that they are in need of a more intensive treatment than the babies with less serious problems. However, it is important to note that the product has a high efficiency also on colicky babies. Concerning the indication constipation no direct conclusions may be drawn, as only the two babies with constipation was included in the test.