Research project led by Bailey Hanna, MS, RDN - no affiliate links, ads or sponsored products.
One study has evaluated Lactobacillus acidophilus SDC 2012, 2013 in an adult IBS population of varied subtypes. (1) While the study reported benefits for bowel habit satisfaction, straining, incomplete evacuation, and abdominal pain/discomfort, we cannot be confident in these results for several reasons.
The study relied on percent changes on interval scales, which can distort research findings by exaggerating small effects, obscuring baseline values, and masking variability. This approach can make minor differences seem more significant than they are, and without context (like raw data or standard deviations), it can mislead readers into overestimating the intervention’s effectiveness. We had to recalculate means and estimate standard deviations for most parameters. This selective reporting and potential spin in the research led us to disqualify this study from our database.
Key Takeaways:
The study evaluating Lactobacillus acidophilus SDC 2012, 2013 has been disqualified from our database due to evidence quality concerns. More research is needed to fully understand the effects of this probiotic in IBS populations.
Dosing Instructions:
None
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 quality studies in IBS populations supporting it. View our evidence evaluation framework to learn how we assess the quality of studies.
Add condition
Therapeutic effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus-SDC 2012, 2013 in patients with irritable bowel syndrome
Dig Dis Sci 2008; 53(10):2714-8
ADULTS 18-70 years
No data
For “straining at stool,” there was a 25.4% reduction in symptom scores from baseline (95% CI: 17.2% to 33.6%). This improvement was statistically significant compared to the placebo group, which had only a 2.1% reduction (95% CI: -5.8% to 10.1%), with a p-value of <0.001.
For the sense of incomplete evacuation, there was a 21.8% reduction in symptom scores from baseline (95% CI: 11.1% to 32.5%). This improvement was also statistically significant compared to the placebo group, which had an 8.3% reduction (95% CI: -2.4% to 19.1%), with a p-value of 0.011. These values were measured on a scale of 0 (good) to 10 (bad).
For bowel habit satisfaction, there was a statistically significant reduction in symptom scores from baseline when comparing the probiotic and placebo groups. The probiotic group showed an 18.2% reduction in symptoms (ranging from -8.1% to 44.5%, 95% CI), while the placebo group experienced a -6.3% change (ranging from -18.3% to 6.7%, 95% CI), with a p-value of <0.001.
This was measured on a scale from 0 (good) to 10 (bad). It’s important to note that the confidence intervals in the probiotic group were wide, indicating that the probiotic could potentially lead to either a worsening or improvement of symptoms.
Four weeks of treatment with L. acidophilus SDC 2012, 2013 was associated with a reduced score for abdominal pain or discomfort compared to the baseline (P = 0.011).
The percent reduction in abdominal pain or discomfort exceeded the placebo scores by more than 20% (23.8 (15.3% to 32.3%, CI 95%) and 0.2%(-14.3% to 14.7%, CI 95%) for probiotics and placebo, respectively, P = 0.003).
There was a significant difference in the proportion of abdominal pain/discomfort responders between the probiotic and placebo groups (P = 0.011).
While no subtype-specific analysis was conducted, 65% of the probiotic group (n=13) and 60% of the placebo group (n=12) were classified as having IBS-M (mixed IBS). Despite the study’s small population size, the beneficial results observed were notably seen in a predominantly IBS-M population.