Background: Improving preoperative anaemia is associated with a better surgical outcome. There is lack of data regarding treatment of preoperative anaemia with intravenous versus oral iron.Objective: Assessment of efficacy of oral iron sulphate versus a single intravenous iron polymaltose and subsequent effect on perceived quality of life in both treatment groups. Patients and methods:We conducted a prospective randomised controlled trial with iron therapy for the treatment of Iron Deficiency Anaemia (IDA) patients who were undergoing elective joint arthroplasty. At a single institution, we recruited 44 patients who were randomized to a single intravenous iron polymaltose infusion (16/22) versus oral daily iron sulphate (17/22). Median age was 68 years (range, 45-91) with a male to female ratio of 14:19.

Oral regimens for bowel preparation before barium enema examination are routinely used because of their convenience and simplicity, rather than the traditional method of colonic wash-out. We performed a prospective study comparing the side-effects and efficacy of two commonly used oral bowel evacuants (Citromag and Golytely) for bowel preparation before barium enema examination in 102 patients. The side-effects associated with the agents were assessed by analysing a questionnaire completed by the patients. There was no significant difference in the side-effects between the two agents although more patients taking Golytely (45.5%) deemed its taste unacceptable than those taking Citromag (25.9%). The results of the bowel preparation were assessed by two independent radiologists giving scores on the amount of faecal residue and the quality of mucosal coating. The amount of faecal residue was less in the Golytely group (p < 0.05). The quality of mucosal coating by barium was also better in the Golytely group than the Citromag group (p < 0.05).