Research project led by Bailey Hanna, MS, RDN - no affiliate links, ads or sponsored products.
Three studies on Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086 were reviewed, with only one included in our database:
Key Takeaways: While dosing information is provided below for improving bowel movement frequency in IBS-D, the available evidence for this probiotic in IBS is of very poor quality, and more research is needed to confirm potential benefits.
Dosing:
Trial Duration
References:
Evaluate them based on whether they transparently disclose all ingredients and their amounts, exclusively use probiotics tested in randomized placebo-controlled trials in IBS populations, contain the dosages studied, and are free from gastrointestinal irritants.
This probiotic has low to moderate quality studies in IBS populations supporting it. View our evidence evaluation framework to learn how we assess the quality of studies.
Add condition
Original Research: Bacillus coagulans Significantly Improved Abdominal Pain and Bloating in Patients with IBS
Postgraduate Medicine, 121:2, 119-124
ADULTS 23-70 years
Effects of a proprietary Bacillus coagulans preparation on symptoms of diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome
Methods & Findings in Experimental & Clinical Pharmacology, 31 (10) (2009), pp. 655-659
ADULTS
No data
Mean abdominal pain severity scores decreased by 22.3% from baseline to week 8. Statistically significant improvement from baseline was noted beginning at the week 2 measurement and throughout the intervention.
No between group statistical analysis was available due to stark differences in baseline symptom severity values (placebo group with milder symptoms). The placebo group only had a statistically significant improvement for 2/8 weeks (weeks 6 and 8). There was a mean 18.9% reduction in abdominal pain severity at week 8 for the placebo group.
Mean bloating severity scores decreased by 20.7% from baseline to week 8. Statistically significant within group improvement from baseline was noted beginning at the week 2 measurement and throughout the intervention.
No between group statistical analysis was available due to stark differences in baseline symptom severity values (placebo group with milder symptoms). There was no statistically significant improvement in bloating for any week of the intervention in the placebo group, though a mean 11.5% decrease in bloating severity scores was evident at week 8 in the placebo group.
The study population consisted exclusively of IBS-D patients. Although some within-group statistically significant improvements were observed in the probiotic group from baseline, there was no between-group statistical analysis with the placebo group. As a result, the effects for IBS-D were classified as neutral.
This study faced several critical issues that seriously undermined its credibility. It failed to report variability measures, like standard deviations, and did not use inferential statistics to compare groups. Additionally, the groups had vastly different baseline values, which could lead to bias. The study also selectively reported results, omitting key details and skewing the overall findings. Finally, the authors made incorrect inferences, potentially spinning the results to appear more favorable than they are. Due to these significant flaws, we have disqualified this study from our database.
In a post hoc analysis, 375 weekly stool counts were collected from 52 patients (26 on active treatment and 26 on placebo), averaging 7.2 weekly measurements per patient. After adjusting for baseline counts and age, the study found a significant reduction in the average number of bowel movements per day in the B. coagulans GBI-30, 6086 group compared to placebo (P = 0.042; Cohen’s d = 1.31).
See diarrhea cell
In the analysis of patient-assessed measures, including severity scores and quality of life, the large variability in baseline scores prevented assessment of treatment differences. Although there were no significant differences in patient-assessed measures between the placebo and active treatment groups, baseline variance is likely to have skewed the between-group analysis.
All reported effects were observed in an IBS-D population. There were no significant differences in patient-assessed measures between the placebo and probiotic groups, likely due to dissimilar baseline symptom severity. However, there was a statistically significant improvement in bowel movement frequency in the probiotic group (see bowel habits data for more details).