Gum Chewing After Cesarean Section and Postoperative Ileus
This paper reviews two research articles examining the effects of gum chewing on postoperative recovery. The first study by Harma et al. (2009) investigates whether sugar-free or sugar-substitute gum accelerates bowel recovery following cesarean section. The second article by Lafon and Lawson (2012) synthesizes multiple studies on gum chewing as a strategy to reduce postoperative ileus after gastrointestinal surgery. Together, the sources suggest that gum chewing stimulates the cephalic-vagal system, promotes earlier return of bowel function, and reduces hospital stay duration—offering a cost-effective, low-risk alternative to early postoperative feeding.
- Gum Chewing Following Cesarean Section: Trial comparing sugar-free and sugar-substitute gum after cesarean
- Gum Chewing to Reduce Postoperative Ileus: Review of studies on gum chewing reducing postoperative ileus
- Works Cited: Citations for both referenced research articles
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper clearly summarizes two distinct studies in separate, well-organized sections, making it easy to compare findings across different surgical contexts.
- Specific numerical data (e.g., first bowel sounds at 6.3, 8.8, and 11.2 postoperative hours) are cited directly from the source studies, lending concrete support to the paper's claims.
- The paper draws a practical conclusion about cost-effectiveness and patient safety, connecting clinical findings to real-world healthcare implications.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper demonstrates effective comparative summarization: the writer distills complex experimental findings into accessible prose while preserving the key distinctions between study groups (control, sugar-free, sugar-substitute). The concluding synthesis in each section moves beyond mere description to evaluate the significance of the findings, a hallmark of undergraduate-level critical engagement with research.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized into two body sections, each corresponding to one source article. The first section addresses a specific clinical trial on cesarean patients; the second broadens the scope to review meta-analytic literature on postoperative ileus in general GI surgery. A standard Works Cited page follows. This parallel structure keeps the argument clear and the sources easy to distinguish.
Gum Chewing Following Cesarean Section
In their research article entitled "Gum-Chewing Speeds Return of First Bowel Sounds but Not First Defecation after Cesarean Section," Harma et al. (2009) explore a two-fold research question. First, they investigated the duration of postoperative ileus when gum was chewed following a cesarean section. Second, they examined whether there was a difference in outcomes when comparing patients who chewed sugar-free gum with those who chewed gum containing a sugar substitute.
In the experiment, 76 women were divided into three groups: the control group, the sugar-free gum group, and the sugar-substitute gum group. Patients assigned to chew gum did so every fifteen minutes, beginning two hours after surgery. The researchers found no marked difference among the three groups in the time it took to experience their first episode of flatus following the cesarean section. Similarly, there was little or no difference in the time to first defecation when comparing the three groups.
However, the researchers did find that the first bowel sounds appeared significantly sooner in patients given sugar-substitute gum than in either of the other two groups. Those given sugar-substitute gum experienced their first bowel sounds at approximately 6.3 postoperative hours. Patients given sugar-free gum had their first bowel sounds at an average of 8.8 postoperative hours. Patients in the control group experienced their first bowel sounds at an average of 11.2 hours.
Therefore, chewing sugar-free gum after a cesarean section is better than chewing no gum at all, but sugar-substitute gum is the most effective option when the goal is to produce the earliest return of bowel sounds. In terms of flatus and defecation, however, there is no significant difference among participants in any of the three groups.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.