Next Article in Journal
Using Hormone Data and Age to Pinpoint Cycle Day within the Menstrual Cycle
Previous Article in Journal
Leiomyoma with Uncommon Localization—Incisive Papilla and Palatal Fibromucosa: A Case Report
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 59
Issue 7
10.3390/medicina59071347
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Prevalence, Recognition, and Risk Factors of Constipation among Medically Hospitalized Patients: A Cohort Prospective Study

by
Jawahar Al Nou’mani
1,
Abdullah M. Al Alawi
1,2,*,
Juhaina Salim Al-Maqbali
3,4,
Nahid Al Abri
5 and
Maryam Al Sabbri
5
1
Internal Medicine Residency Training Program, Oman Medical Specialty Board, Muscat 130, Oman
2
Department of Medicine, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat 123, Oman
3
Department of Pharmacy, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat 123, Oman
4
Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat 123, Oman
5
College of Medicine and Health Science, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat 123, Oman
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2023, 59(7), 1347; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59071347
Submission received: 26 June 2023 / Revised: 15 July 2023 / Accepted: 21 July 2023 / Published: 23 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Gastroenterology & Hepatology)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background and Objective: Constipation is a prevalent gastrointestinal condition that has a substantial impact on individuals and healthcare systems. This condition adversely affects health-related quality of life and leads to escalated healthcare expenses due to an increase in office visits, referrals to specialists, and hospital admission. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, recognition, risk factors, and course of constipation among hospitalized patients in medical wards. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was conducted, including all adult patients admitted to the General Medicine Unit between 1 February 2022 and 31 August 2022. Constipation was identified using the Constipation Assessment Scale (CAS), and relevant factors were extracted from the patients’ medical records. Results: Among the patients who met the inclusion criteria (n = 556), the prevalence of constipation was determined to be 55.6% (95% CI 52.8–58.4). Patients with constipation were found to be older (p < 0.01) and had higher frailty scores (p < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis revealed that heart failure (Odds ratio (OR) 2.1; 95% CI 1.2–3.7; p = 0.01), frailty score (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2–1.5; p < 0.01), and dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2–2.8; p < 0.01) were independent risk factors for constipation. Furthermore, the medical team did not identify constipation in 217 patients (64.01%). Conclusions: Constipation is highly prevalent among medically hospitalized patients. To ensure timely recognition and treatment, it is essential to incorporate a daily constipation assessment scale into each patient’s medical records.

1. Introduction

Constipation is characterized by unsatisfactory bowel movements resulting from infrequent stools, difficulty passing stool, or a combination of both. Symptoms associated with constipation include, but are not limited to, hard stools, excessive straining, infrequent bowel movements, bloating, and abdominal pain. When these symptoms persist for more than one month, constipation is considered chronic [1]. The condition can arise idiopathically or as a result of various secondary causes, including neurological factors such as damage to the spinal cord, sacral parasympathetic nerves, or the impact of Parkinson’s disease on colon transit time. Other contributing factors may involve dyssynergic relaxation of the pelvic floor muscles, metabolic disorders such as hypothyroidism or diabetes mellitus, mechanical obstructing lesions like colorectal cancer, psychiatric disorders such as anorexia nervosa or irritable bowel syndrome, or medication side effects [2,3,4,5].
Constipation is a common gastrointestinal disease that significantly affects individuals and healthcare systems [6]. Constipation affects health-related quality of life and increases healthcare costs by increasing office visits, specialty referrals, and hospital admissions [7,8]. The reported prevalence of constipation among the community-dwelling adult population ranged from 2 to 35% [9,10,11,12]. The wide variation in reported prevalence may be due to differences in age groups, culture, diet, and environment as well as the differences in the definition of chronic constipation [6].
In contrast to community and outpatient settings, there has been limited research on the prevalence of constipation specifically among hospitalized patients. Previous studies have reported varying prevalence rates of constipation in acutely hospitalized patients, ranging from 14.8% to 65% [13,14,15,16]. The reported variation in prevalence rates can be attributed to the utilization of different definitions for constipation and the reliance on retrospective reviews of patients’ records [14]. Old age, use of certain medications such as opioids, and increased length of hospital stay were associated with increased prevalence of constipation in hospitalized patients [13,14,15,16].
In light of the limited availability of high-quality evidence regarding constipation in hospitalized patients, we conducted a prospective study with the aim of assessing the prevalence, recognition, and risk factors associated with constipation in medically hospitalized patients.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Setting, Design, and Population

This prospective cohort study was conducted at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH), a multi-specialty tertiary hospital with 600 beds. SQUH is recognized as a prominent academic center and provides high-quality care to patients referred from all regions of the Sultanate of Oman [17,18,19]. The study encompassed all patients aged 12 years and above who were admitted under the care of General Internal Medicine (GIM) at SQUH between 1 February 2022 and 31 August 2022. Patients directly admitted to acute care units (the intensive care unit or high dependency unit), as well as those with colostomy or ileostomy, were excluded from the study. Informed consent was obtained from patients or their next of kin when necessary, such as in cases of lacking capacity due to conditions such as stroke, dementia, or others.

2.2. Sample Size

Based on previous studies, the reported prevalence of constipation in acutely hospitalized patients varied from 14.8% to 65% [13,14,15,16]. To determine the prevalence of constipation in our specific hospital setting, we estimated that a minimum of 391 patients would be required, considering a 95% confidence interval and a 5% margin of error.

2.3. Data Collection, Assessment Tools, and Definitions

Prospectively, a team of trained nursing trainees and medical students (acting as research assistants) collected the following data: demographic information, comorbidity details, medication records, admission data (length of stay, primary diagnosis), frailty scores, constipation-related information (prevalence, severity, treatment), and recognition of constipation by the treating team prior to the involvement of the research team (reflected in medical records or initiation of treatment). To assess constipation, the Constipation Assessment Scale (CAS) was utilized [20]. The constipation score for each hospitalized patient was determined at specific time points (days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28) based on their length of stay. The primary diagnoses of the patients were categorized according to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).
Constipation was defined using CAS which consists of eight characteristics [20]. Each characteristic was rated on a three-point scale: ‘no problem’ (scored as 0), ‘some problem’ (scored as 1), and ‘severe problem’ (scored as 2). These characteristics include abdominal distension or bloating, changes in the amount of gas passed rectally, less frequent bowel movements, oozing liquid stool, rectal fullness or pressure, rectal pain with bowel movement, a small volume of stool, and the inability to pass stool. The total scores on the CAS range from 0 to 16. A score of 0 to 1 indicates no constipation, a score of 2 to 6 suggests mild to moderate constipation, and a score of 7 to 16 signifies severe constipation [21,22]. Previous validation studies demonstrated that CAS is a reliable, valid, and suitable scale to assess the presence and severity of constipation [20,23]. The highest score for each patient throughout admission was counted to ascertain the presence of constipation and assess the severity of constipation. In the case of terminally ill patients and non-communicating patients, information was obtained through clinical examination, specifically by observing for abdominal distention. Additionally, information was gathered from the patient’s attendant, such as the timing of the last bowel movement and the character of the stool.
The clinical frailty of patients was evaluated using a scale that comprised nine levels of dependency. These levels were defined as follows: 1—very fit, 2—well, 3—managing well, 4—vulnerable, 5—mildly frail, 6—moderately frail, 7—severely frail, 8—very severely frail, and 9—terminally ill. Based on the frailty score, the functional status of patients was categorized into three groups: independent (levels 1–4), partial dependence (levels 5–6), and full dependence (levels 7–9) [21,24].
All research assistants involved in data collection underwent a structured training program, which encompassed various aspects such as obtaining informed consent, proper data collection techniques, and administering the frailty scale and CAS accurately and appropriately.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to assess the normality of continuous variables and expressed them as mean and standard deviation (SD) for normally distributed data or median and interquartile range (IQR) for non-normally distributed data. Differences between groups were assessed using one-way ANOVA for normally distributed variables or Kruskal–Wallis rank test for non-normally distributed variables. Categorical variables were reported as numbers, and percentages and differences between groups were compared using Pearson’s χ2 tests (or Fisher’s exact tests for expected cells < 5). All relevant factors with p-value < 0.3 were included in backward stepwise multiple regression analysis to identify independent predictors of constipation. Hazard ratios were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (Cis). Two-sided p-values < 0.05 were statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using the Stata v. 17.0 software package (StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX, USA).

3. Results

Out of all the patients screened, a total of 556 individuals met the inclusion criteria for this study. The median age of the participants was 58 years (IQR: 39–72), and 279 of them (50.18%) were male. Among the included patients, 339 individuals experienced constipation, with 309 patients had constipation on the first day of hospitalization and an additional 30 patients developing constipation after 72 h of hospitalization. This resulted in a calculated prevalence of constipation of 55.6% (95% CI 52.8–58.4) (Table 1).
Surprisingly, constipation was not recognized by the treating team in 217 of the constipated patients, accounting for 64.01% of the cases. The recognized cases were significantly associated with older age (p < 0.01) and higher CAS scores (p < 0.01).
Among patients diagnosed with constipation, 78.8% (n = 267) had mild to moderate constipation, while 21.2% (n = 72) experienced severe constipation. It was observed that patients with constipation tended to be older (p < 0.01) and had higher frailty scores (p < 0.01). The presence of certain comorbidities, including hypertension (p < 0.01), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.02), liver cirrhosis (p < 0.01), chronic kidney disease (p < 0.01), and heart failure (p < 0.01), as well as lower calcium levels (p = 0.01), lower hemoglobin levels (p < 0.01), higher serum creatinine levels (p = 0.02), and the use of opioids (p < 0.01), antihypertensives (p < 0.01), and dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers (CCB) (p < 0.01), were commonly associated with severe constipation (Table 2).
The results of the multivariate regression analysis revealed that preexisting heart failure (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.1; 95% CI 1.2–3.7; p = 0.01), higher frailty score (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2–1.5; p < 0.01), and the use of dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers (CCB) (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2–2.8; p < 0.01) were identified as independent predictors for constipation (Table 3).
Based on the primary diagnosis classified according to ICD-10, it was observed that diseases of the nervous system (p < 0.01) were more prevalent among patients without constipation. Conversely, respiratory system diseases were found to be more common in patients with constipation (p = 0.02) (Table 4).

4. Discussion

This is the first comprehensive prospective study with large sample size using a validated tool to assess constipation prevalence and risk factors in medically hospitalized patients, including those with COVID-19 infection. Constipation was highly prevalent (55.6%), yet significantly unrecognized by treating teams (64.01%). Heart failure, frailty score, and the use of dihydropyridines CCB emerged as independent predictors for constipation.
The prevalence of constipation among medically hospitalized patients was found to be 55.6% in this study. This figure exceeds the prevalence reported in a previous prospective cohort study, which reported a prevalence of 43% by day 3 of admission [13]. It is important to note that our study assessed patients for constipation over a longer duration, up to 28 days of hospitalization. In a recent retrospective cross-sectional study involving elderly hospitalized patients (n = 321), only 6% were diagnosed with constipation based on ICD-10 codes. However, clinical documentation indicated that 65% of these patients exhibited signs and symptoms of constipation [14]. Overall, the reported prevalence of constipation in acutely hospitalized patients varies widely, ranging from 14.8% to 65% [13,14,15,16]. These discrepancies can be attributed, in part, to differences in patient demographics, dietary factors, environmental conditions, and cultural influences, as well as variations in the definition of constipation and the reliance on retrospective record reviews, which may introduce inaccuracies [6,9,10,13,25].
In our cohort, patients with constipation were older (p < 0.01) and had higher frailty scores (p < 0.01). These findings are consistent with previous studies, where old age and increased friability were associated with an increased risk of constipation [26,27]. Old age and frailty are associated with decreased mobility, increased colonic transient time, poor nutrition, comorbidity, and polypharmacy, which could lead to increased risk of constipation [26]. Among individuals residing in the community, the prevalence of constipation tends to rise with age. In studies conducted among the population aged over 65 years, it was found that 26% of women and 16% of men identified themselves as experiencing constipation. Moreover, within a subgroup of patients aged 84 years, the proportion of individuals reporting constipation increased to 34% among women and 26% among men [1].
In contrast to the existing literature, our study revealed that patients with constipation had a lower prevalence of nervous system disorders [28,29,30]. Patients with nervous system disorders are less mobile; however, our constipated cohort has a lower percentage of fully dependent individuals. A community study on constipation showed there was a higher prevalence of constipation in more frail patients (41.7% frail vs. 33.9% pre-frail vs. 24.2% robust; p < 0.001), which is in line with our findings [31].
A higher prevalence of respiratory system diseases has been reported in the literature in patients with constipation. Constipation exposes patients to hypoxia and respiratory distress [32,33,34], along with the association with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma [33,35]. Constipation increases the risk of delirium in the elderly, which increases their risk of aspiration [36].
There were more patients with diabetes mellitus among the group of patients with constipation, especially those with severe constipation (p < 0.01). Previous studies linked diabetes mellitus to constipation, and it was reported as high as 60% prevalence of constipation in community-dwelling patients with diabetes mellitus [37,38]. The exact cause of the increased prevalence of constipation in patients with diabetes mellitus is unclear, but it may be related to diet, medications, or other comorbid conditions [37]. A recent study from Japan demonstrated that constipation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with diabetic retinopathy and diabetic nephropathy [38], and it was suggested that the presence of constipation in patients with diabetes mellitus might help in identifying patients who are at high risk of having progression of chronic kidney disease [39].
The study demonstrated that constipation is significantly associated with heart failure and liver cirrhosis. Patients with heart failure can develop thickened, edematous bowel if uncontrolled [40], and diuretic use can reduce body fluids leading to harder stool [41]. Furthermore, it was found that constipation prophylaxis in patients admitted with decompensated heart failure can shorten length of stay [42]. Previous studies have linked constipation to cardiovascular events. The alterations in the intestinal microbiota caused by constipation can contribute to the development of atherosclerosis, elevated blood pressure, and subsequent cardiovascular events. As constipation tends to increase with age, it frequently coexists with other cardiovascular risk factors. Furthermore, straining during bowel movements can lead to an increase in blood pressure, potentially triggering cardiovascular events such as arrhythmia, congestive heart failure, and acute coronary disease [41].
In patients with liver cirrhosis, constipation can be explained by several mechanisms, including delayed gastric emptying, prolonged small bowel transit time and gut edema induced by portal hypertension with gut vasculopathy or ascites [43].
We showed a significant association between the use of antihypertensive medications and constipation in our study. Specifically, dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers (CCBs), particularly amlodipine, were widely used by 70.9% of patients with hypertension in our cohort. Among the constipated group, 122 out of 339 (36%) patients were found to be taking dihydropyridines CCBs (p < 0.01). Previous reports showed that the prevalence of constipation associated with non-dihydropyridines CCBs like verapamil, ranging from 4% to 9% [44,45,46,47]. Additionally, higher doses of non-dihydropyridines CCBs have shown a stronger correlation with constipation. In contrast, amlodipine has been reported to cause constipation to a lesser extent (2%) [48,49]. Adverse drug reactions related to constipation sometimes lead to treatment discontinuation [50]. A recent study has demonstrated that amlodipine alone carries a four-fold higher relative risk of constipation incidents compared to its combination with atenolol [51]. Given that our constipated patients were elderly, caution is advised in combining constipation-inducing antihypertensive drugs (including ACE inhibitors) with amlodipine to prevent further complications [52].
Opioid-induced constipation is an established condition and was well described in the literature [53]. However, the use of opioids to improve constipation pain is widely discouraged. At the same time, it is a complex situation making it difficult to balance the urgency to treat pain, specifically in old patients. It is recommended to use other analgesics, assess for constipation pain and use laxatives [53,54].
Anemia is the most prevalent morbidity among the group with constipation. Lifestyle and dietary habits themselves can impact patients’ anemic status, while bowel habits as a result of food type, medications used to treat their anemia (e.g., oral iron supplement) or certain vitamins deficiency as vitamin B12 deficiency, which is linked to autonomic dysfunction, delayed gastric emptying, and constipation [55,56,57]. Hypocalcemia is associated with spasm and tetany, leading to autonomic manifestations including diaphoresis, bronchospasm, and biliary colic. Constipation is correlated to hypercalcemia rather than hypocalcemia [58]. However, it was reported that severe constipation improved after hypocalcemia correction [59].
This study has several strengths that contribute to its significance. Firstly, it addresses a research gap by focusing specifically on the prevalence, recognition, and risk factors associated with constipation in the hospital setting. Previous studies have primarily focused on community and outpatient settings. Secondly, the study utilized a prospective cohort design, allowing for the collection of data over an extended period of 28 days of hospitalization. This longer duration of assessment provides a more comprehensive understanding of constipation in hospitalized patients. Thirdly, the study employed a validated assessment tool, AS, to evaluate constipation prevalence and severity. The use of a validated tool enhances the reliability and validity of the study’s findings.
Despite its strengths, the study also has some limitations. One limitation is the exclusion of patients directly admitted to acute care units. Also, the study was conducted at a single tertiary hospital, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other healthcare settings.

5. Conclusions

This comprehensive prospective study on constipation in medically hospitalized patients provides valuable insights into the prevalence, recognition, and risk factors associated with constipation in this population. The study revealed a high prevalence of constipation (55.6%) among hospitalized patients, with constipation frequently going unrecognized by the treating teams (64.01% of cases). The study identified heart failure, frailty score, and the use of dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers (CCB) as independent predictors for constipation. These findings highlight the importance of considering constipation as a significant issue in hospitalized patients and emphasize the need for improved recognition and management by healthcare providers. Future research should aim to replicate these findings in diverse healthcare settings and explore interventions to improve the recognition and management of constipation in hospitalized patients, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and reducing healthcare costs associated with constipation-related complications.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.M.A.A., J.A.N., and J.S.A.-M.; methodology, A.M.A.A., J.A.N., and J.S.A.-M.; software, A.M.A.A., J.A.N., and J.S.A.-M.; validation, A.M.A.A. and J.A.N.; formal analysis, A.M.A.A. and J.S.A.-M.;resources, A.M.A.A. and J.A.N.; data curation, N.A.A., M.A.S., and J.A.N.; writing—original draft preparation, J.A.N.; writing—review and editing, A.M.A.A. and J.S.A.-M.; supervision, A.M.A.A. and J.S.A.-M.; project administration, J.A.N.; funding acquisition, J.A.N. and A.M.A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study received a grant from the Ministry of Education, Research and Innovation, Oman (BFP/GRG/HSS/22/046).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Medical and Research Ethics Committee at the College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman (MREC #2852; SQU-EC/007/2022; dated: 10 August 2021).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from patients or their next of kin when necessary, such as in cases of lacking capacity due to conditions such as stroke, dementia, or others.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to patients related privacy issues.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Scott, S.M.; Simrén, M.; Farmer, A.D.; Dinning, P.G.; Carrington, E.V.; Benninga, M.A.; Burgell, R.E.; Dimidi, E.; Fikree, A.; Ford, A.C.; et al. Chronic constipation in adults: Contemporary perspectives and clinical challenges. 1: Epidemiology, diagnosis, clinical associations, pathophysiology and investigation. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2021, 33, e14050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Read, N.; Timms, J. Defecation and the pathophysiology of constipation. Clin. Gastroenterol. 1986, 15, 937–965. [Google Scholar]
  3. Wald, A.; Hinds, J.P.; Caruana, B.J. Psychological and physiological characteristics of patients with severe idiopathic constipation. Gastroenterology 1989, 97, 932–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hinds, J.P.; Wald, A. Colonic and anorectal dysfunction associated with multiple sclerosis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. (Springer Nat.) 1989, 84, 587–595. [Google Scholar]
  5. Dupont, G.; Wahl, L.; Alcala Dominguez, T.; Wong, T.L.; Haładaj, R.; Wysiadecki, G.; Iwanaga, J.; Tubbs, R.S. Anatomy, physiology, and updates on the clinical management of constipation. Clin. Anat. 2020, 33, 1181–1186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Werth, B.L.; Williams, K.A.; Fisher, M.J.; Pont, L.G. Defining constipation to estimate its prevalence in the community: Results from a national survey. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019, 19, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Gliav, A.; Lindberg, G. Quality of life in patients with different types of functional constipation. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 1997, 32, 1083–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Koloski, N.; Jones, M.; Wai, R.; Gill, R.; Byles, J.; Talley, N.J. Impact of persistent constipation on health-related quality of life and mortality in older community-dwelling women. Off. J. Am. Coll. Gastroenterol. ACG 2013, 108, 1152–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Suares, N.C.; Ford, A.C. Prevalence of, and risk factors for, chronic idiopathic constipation in the community: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2011, 106, 1582–1591, quiz 1581, 1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Peppas, G.; Alexiou, V.G.; Mourtzoukou, E.; Falagas, M.E. Epidemiology of constipation in Europe and Oceania: A systematic review. BMC Gastroenterol. 2008, 8, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Talley, N.J. Definitions, epidemiology, and impact of chronic constipation. Rev. Gastroenterol. Disord. 2004, 4, S3–S10. [Google Scholar]
  12. Choung, R.; Locke, I.G.; Schleck, C.; Zinsmeister, A.; Talley, N. Cumulative incidence of chronic constipation: A population-based study 1988–2003. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2007, 26, 1521–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Noiesen, E.; Trosborg, I.; Bager, L.; Herning, M.; Lyngby, C.; Konradsen, H. Constipation–prevalence and incidence among medical patients acutely admitted to hospital with a medical condition. J. Clin. Nurs. 2014, 23, 2295–2302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Konradsen, H.; Lundberg, V.; Florin, J.; Boström, A.M. Prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives, and association with risk factors among older patients during hospitalization: A cross sectional study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2022, 22, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Junqueira, J.B.; Norton, C.; Santos, V. Constipation in Hospitalized Patients: A Study of Prevalence and Associated Factors. J. Wound Ostomy Cont. Nurs. 2021, 48, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Prat, D.; Messika, J.; Avenel, A.; Jacobs, F.; Fichet, J.; Lemeur, M.; Ricard, J.D.; Sztrymf, B. Constipation incidence and impact in medical critical care patients: Importance of the definition criterion. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016, 28, 290–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Al Sibani, M.; Al-Maqbali, J.S.; Yusuf, Z.; Al Alawi, A.M. Incidence and Risk Factors for 28 Days Hospital Readmission: A Retrospective Study from Oman. Oman Med. J. 2022, 37, e423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Al-Yarabi, A.; Al Balushi, H.; Al Hatmi, K.; Al Yahyaie, R.; Al Alawi, A.M.; Al Zeedy, K.; Al Farhan, H. Inappropriate Hospital Stay of Patients Admitted Under Care of General Medicine Units: A retrospective study. Sultan Qaboos Univ. Med. J. 2022, 1, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Al Alawi, A.M.; Al Busaidi, I.; Al Shibli, E.; Al-Senaidi, A.R.; Al Manwari, S.; Al Busaidi, I.; Muhanna, F.; Al Qassabi, A. Health outcomes after acute ischemic stroke:retrospective and survival analysis from Oman. Ann. Saudi. Med. 2022, 42, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. McMillan, S.C.; Williams, F.A. Validity and reliability of the Constipation Assessment Scale. Cancer Nurs. 1989, 12, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. McMillan, S.C. Presence and severity of constipation in hospice patients with advanced cancer. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Med. ® 2002, 19, 426–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Valenta, S.; Spichiger, E.; Paul, S.M.; Rabow, M.W.; Plano Clark, V.L.; Schumacher, K.L.; Miaskowski, C. A Longitudinal Study of Predictors of Constipation Severity in Oncology Outpatients With Unrelieved Pain. J. Pain. Symptom. Manag. 2020, 59, 9–19.e11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Izumi, K. The measures to evaluate constipation: A review article. Gastroenterol. Nurs. 2014, 37, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pulok, M.H.; Theou, O.; van der Valk, A.M.; Rockwood, K. The role of illness acuity on the association between frailty and mortality in emergency department patients referred to internal medicine. Age Ageing 2020, 49, 1071–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mugie, S.M.; Benninga, M.A.; Di Lorenzo, C. Epidemiology of constipation in children and adults: A systematic review. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2011, 25, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lim, J.; Park, H.; Lee, H.; Lee, E.; Lee, D.; Jung, H.W.; Jang, I.Y. Higher frailty burden in older adults with chronic constipation. BMC Gastroenterol. 2021, 21, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. O’Mahony, D.; O’Leary, P.; Quigley, E.M. Aging and intestinal motility: A review of factors that affect intestinal motility in the aged. Drugs Aging 2002, 19, 515–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bouras, E.P.; Tangalos, E.G. Chronic constipation in the elderly. Gastroenterol. Clin. 2009, 38, 463–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Iovino, P.; Chiarioni, G.; Bilancio, G.; Cirillo, M.; Mekjavic, I.B.; Pisot, R.; Ciacci, C. New onset of constipation during long-term physical inactivity: A proof-of-concept study on the immobility-induced bowel changes. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e72608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Sharma, A.; Kurek, J.; Morgan, J.C.; Wakade, C.; Rao, S.S. Constipation in Parkinson’s disease: A nuisance or nuanced answer to the pathophysiological puzzle? Curr. Gastroenterol. Rep. 2018, 20, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Arco, S.; Saldaña, E.; Serra-Prat, M.; Palomera, E.; Ribas, Y.; Font, S.; Clavé, P.; Mundet, L. Functional constipation in older adults: Prevalence, clinical symptoms and subtypes, association with frailty, and impact on quality of life. Gerontology 2022, 68, 397–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Luder, A.S.; Segal, D.; Saba, N. Hypoxia and chest pain due to acute constipation: An underdiagnosed condition? Pediatr. Pulmonol. 1998, 26, 222–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Huang, Y.C.; Wu, M.C.; Wang, Y.H.; Wei, J.C. The influence of constipation on asthma: A real-world, population-based cohort study. Int. J. Clin. Pr. 2021, 75, e14540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Milanese, A.; Schechter, N.L.; Ganeshananthan, M. Constipation presenting as respiratory distress. J. Adolesc. Health Care 1986, 7, 255–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sun, Y.; Zheng, F.; Li, Y.; Wu, R.; Liu, Y.; Liu, M.; Zhang, J.; Gao, K. Correlation between lower gastrointestinal tract symptoms and quality of life in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J. Tradit. Chin. Med. 2013, 33, 608–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Aspiration pneumonia. Respirology 2009, 14, S59–S64. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Sangnes, D.A.; Lundervold, K.; Bekkelund, M.; von Volkmann, H.L.; Berentsen, B.; Gilja, O.H.; Dimcevski, G.; Søfteland, E. Gastrointestinal transit and contractility in diabetic constipation: A wireless motility capsule study on diabetes patients and healthy controls. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2021, 9, 1168–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ito, H.; Ito, K.; Tanaka, M.; Hokamura, M.; Tanaka, M.; Kusano, E.; Kondo, J.; Izutsu, T.; Matsumoto, S.; Inoue, H.; et al. Constipation Is a Frequent Problem Associated with Vascular Complications in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-sectional Study. Intern. Med. 2022, 61, 1309–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ohkuma, T.; Iwase, M.; Fujii, H.; Ide, H.; Komorita, Y.; Yoshinari, M.; Oku, Y.; Higashi, T.; Oshiro, A.; Nakamura, U.; et al. Constipation and diabetic kidney disease: The Fukuoka Diabetes Registry. Clin. Exp. Nephrol. 2021, 25, 1247–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sandek, A.; Bauditz, J.; Swidsinski, A.; Buhner, S.; Weber-Eibel, J.; Haehling, S.v.; Schroedl, W.; Karhausen, T.; Doehner, W.; Rauchhaus, M.; et al. Altered Intestinal Function in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007, 50, 1561–1569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Ishiyama, Y.; Hoshide, S.; Mizuno, H.; Kario, K. Constipation-induced pressor effects as triggers for cardiovascular events. J. Clin. Hypertens. 2019, 21, 421–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Staller, K.; Khalili, H.; Kuo, B. Constipation prophylaxis reduces length of stay in elderly hospitalized heart failure patients with home laxative use. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, 30, 1596–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kalaitzakis, E. Gastrointestinal dysfunction in liver cirrhosis. World J. Gastroenterol. 2014, 20, 14686–14695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Clement, D.L. Calcium antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension: Review of international studies. J. Cardiovasc. Pharm. 1989, 13 (Suppl. S4), S7–S11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Holzgreve, H.; Distler, A.; Michaelis, J.; Philipp, T.; Wellek, S. Verapamil versus hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of hypertension: Results of long term double blind comparative trial. Verapamil versus Diuretic (VERDI) Trial Research Group. BMJ 1989, 299, 881–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Muijsers, R.B.; Curran, M.P.; Perry, C.M. Fixed combination trandolapril/verapamil sustained-release: A review of its use in essential hypertension. Drugs 2002, 62, 2539–2567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Forootan, M.; Bagheri, N.; Darvishi, M. Chronic constipation: A review of literature. Medicine 2018, 97, e10631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Ueki, T.; Nakashima, M. Relationship Between Constipation and Medication. J. Uoeh 2019, 41, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Flack, J.M.; Victor, R.; Watson, K.; Ferdinand, K.C.; Saunders, E.; Tarasenko, L.; Jamieson, M.J.; Shi, H.; Bruschi, P. Improved attainment of blood pressure and cholesterol goals using single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin in African Americans: The CAPABLE trial. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2008, 83, 35–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Dougall, H.T.; McLay, J. A comparative review of the adverse effects of calcium antagonists. Drug Saf. 1996, 15, 91–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Saha, L.; Shekhar Gautam, C. The effect of amlodipine alone and in combination with atenolol on bowel habit in patients with hypertension: An observation. ISRN Gastroenterol. 2011, 2011, 757141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Al Khaja, K.A.J.; James, H.; Veeramuthu, S.; Tayem, Y.I.; Sridharan, K.; Sequeira, R.P. Prevalence of drugs with constipation-inducing potential and laxatives in community-dwelling older adults in Bahrain: Therapeutic implications. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2020, 28, 466–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Prichard, D.; Norton, C.; Bharucha, A.E. Management of opioid-induced constipation. Br. J. Nurs. 2016, 25, S4–S11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Bardsley, A. Assessment and treatment options for patients with constipation. Br. J. Nurs. 2017, 26, 312–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Sharma, A.; Rao, S. Constipation: Pathophysiology and Current Therapeutic Approaches. Handb. Exp. Pharm. 2017, 239, 59–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sahebzamani, F.M.; Berarducci, A.; Murr, M.M. Malabsorption anemia and iron supplement induced constipation in post-Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) patients. J. Am. Assoc. Nurse Pract. 2013, 25, 634–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yağci, M.; Yamaç, K.; Acar, K.; Cingi, E.; Kitapçi, M.; Haznedar, R. Gastric emptying in patients with vitamin B(12) deficiency. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imag. 2002, 29, 1125–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tohme, J.F.; Bilezikian, J.P. Hypocalcemic emergencies. Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. North Am. 1993, 22, 363–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Margulies, A.; Metman, E.; Girard, J.; Dorval, E.; Bertrand, J. Severe constipation indicative of pseudohypoparathyroidism and resolved after normalization of the blood calcium. In Proceedings of the Annales de Gastroenterologie et D’hepatologie, Paris, France, 22 October 1986; pp. 271–272. [Google Scholar]
Table
Table 1. Demographics and clinical characteristics of the admitted patients (n = 556).
Table 1. Demographics and clinical characteristics of the admitted patients (n = 556).
Characteristic, All (N = 556)n (%) Unless Specified Otherwise
Age (IQR), years58 (39–72)
Female277 (49.82%)
Hypertension282 (50.72%)
Diabetes Mellitus (DM)226 (40.65%)
Liver Cirrhosis15 (2.70%)
Chronic kidney disease (CKD)73 (13.13%)
Heart failure (HF)100 (17.99%)
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)30 (5.4%)
Dementia21 (3.78%)
Hypothyroidism21 (8.54%)
Anemia283 (51.55%)
Table
Table 2. Patients’ demographics, clinical, and biochemical characteristics according to constipation.
Table 2. Patients’ demographics, clinical, and biochemical characteristics according to constipation.
CharacteristicAll n = 556 (%) Unless Specified OtherwiseNo Constipation n = 217 (%)Mild–Moderate Constipation n = 267 (%)Severe Constipation
n = 72 (%)		p Value
Age (IQR), years58 (39–72)46 (29–65)62 (44–74)69.5 (55.5–76.5)<0.01
Female277 (49.82%)103 (47.47%)133 (49.81%)41 (56.94%)0.38
CAS’s highest score during hospitalization2 (0–4)03 (2–4)7 (7–9)<0.01
Comorbidities
Hypertension282 (50.72%)87 (40.09%)138 (51.69%)57 (79.17%)<0.01
Diabetes Mellitus (DM)226 (40.65%)81 (37.33%)105 (39.33%)40 (55.56%)0.02
Liver Cirrhosis 15 (2.70%)07 (2.62%)8 (11.11%)<0.01
Chronic kidney disease (CKD)73 (13.13%)18 (8.29%)34 (12.73%)21 (29.17%)<0.01
Heart failure (HF)100 (17.99%)18 (8.29%)58 (21.72%)24 (33.33%)<0.01
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)30 (5.40%)8 (3.69%)19 (7.12%)3 (4.17%)0.22
Hypothyroidism21 (8.54%)3 (3.53%)13 (10.66%)5 (12.82%)0.11
Depression14 (2.55%)4 (1.86%)8 (3.03%)2 (2.86%)0.71
Dementia21 (3.78%)6 (2.76%)12 (4.49%)3 (4.17%)0.60
History of abdominal surgery23 (4.14%)6 (2.76%)13 (4.87%)4 (5.56%)0.42
History of gastrointestinal malignancy11 (1.98%)6 (2.76%)5 (1.87%)00.34
Frailty status
Frailty score (IQR), the total number4 (2–6)2 (1–4)5 (3–6)6 (3–7)<0.01
Independent304 (54.68%)165 (76.04%)115 (43.07%)24 (33.33%)<0.01
Partial dependence150 (26.98%)28 (12.90%)94 (35.21%)28 (38.89%)<0.01
Full dependence 102 (18.35%)24 (11.06%)58 (21.72%)20 (27.78%)<0.01
Biochemical profile
Deranged liver function 243 (48.50%)82 (41.84%)123 (52.12%)38 (55.07%)0.05
Serum calcium (IQR), mmol/l2.25 (2.14–2.36)2.3 (2.18–2.38)2.24 (2.14–2.34)2.21 (2.09–2.32)0.01
Serum potassium (IQR), mmol/l4.2 (3.9–4.6)4.2 (3.9–4.6)4.2 (3.9–4.6)4.3 (3.8–4.6)0.05
Hemoglobulin (IQR)11.1 (9.2–13)12.3 (9.8–13.5)10.8 (9.1–12.7)9.85 (8.6–11.9)<0.01
Serum creatinine (IQR), mmol/l75 (57–108.5)71 (57.5–102)75.5 (55.5–109)93 (63–150.5)0.02
TSH, (IQR), mmol/l2.07 (1.16–3.49)1.96 (1.03–3.53)1.93 (1.16–3.47)2.52 (1.61–3.51)0.35
T4 (IQR), mmol/l15.8 (13.9–18.4)16 (14.2–17.9)15.6 (13.7–18.6)16.7 (12.8–18.5)0.35
Medications
Antidepressants 4 (0.72%)3 (1.40%)1 (0.38%)00.31
Antipsychotic medications 17 (3.08%)5 (2.33%)8 (3.02%)4 (5.56%)0.39
Iron supplements 49 (8.88%)16 (7.44%)29 (10.94%)4 (5.56%)0.23
Opioids 101 (18.30%)32 (14.88%)46 (17.36%)23 (31.94%)<0.01
5-HT3antagonists116 (21.01%)51 (23.72%)49 (18.49%)16 (22.22%)0.36
Antihistamines72 (13.04%)28 (13.02%)35 (13.21%)9 (12.50%)0.99
Antihypertensives 230 (41.67%)68 (31.63%)110 (41.51%)52 (72.22%)<0.01
Dihydropyridines Calcium Channel Blockers (CCB)163 (29.53%)41 (19.07%)93 (35.09%)29 (40.28%)<0.01
Table
Table 3. Risk factors multi-regression analysis: independent risk factors.
Table 3. Risk factors multi-regression analysis: independent risk factors.
Overall ConstipationOdds Ratio95% CIp Value
Heart failure2.091.18–3.730.01
Frailty1.351.24–1.48<0.01
CCB1.781.26–2.76<0.01
Table
Table 4. Primary diagnosis classified according to ICD-10.
Table 4. Primary diagnosis classified according to ICD-10.
Primary Diagnosis (ICD-10)All (n = 556)No Constipation n = 217 (%)Mild–Moderate Constipation n = 267 (%)Severe Constipation
n = 72 (%)		p Value
Infectious disease (A00–B99) 46 (8.27%)24 (11.06%)19 (7.12%)3 (4.17%)0.14
Hematological diseases (D50–D89)18 (3.24%)6 (2.76%)11 (4.12%)1 (1.39%)0.49
Endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases (E00–E90)51 (9.17%)17 (7.83%)24 (8.99%)10 (13.89%)0.30
Mental and behavioral disorders (F00–F99)16 (2.88%)9 (4.15%)6 (2.25%)1 (1.39%)0.43
Diseases of the nervous system (G00–G99)36 (6.47%)24 (11.06%)12 (4.49%)0<0.01
Diseases of the circulatory system (I00–I99)94 (16.91%)29 (13.36%)49 (18.35%)16 (22.22%)0.15
Diseases of the respiratory system (J00–J99)91 (16.37%)29 (13.36%)42 (15.73%)20 (27.78%)0.02
Diseases of the digestive system (K00–K93)52 (9.35%)18 (8.29%)28 (10.49%)6 (8.33%)0.68
Diseases of the genitourinary system (N00–N99)54 (9.71%)14 (6.45%)34 (12.73%)6 (8.33%)0.10
Others98 (556%)47 (21.66%)42 (15.73%)9 (12.50%)0.19
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Al Nou’mani, J.; Al Alawi, A.M.; Al-Maqbali, J.S.; Al Abri, N.; Al Sabbri, M. Prevalence, Recognition, and Risk Factors of Constipation among Medically Hospitalized Patients: A Cohort Prospective Study. Medicina 2023, 59, 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59071347

AMA Style

Al Nou’mani J, Al Alawi AM, Al-Maqbali JS, Al Abri N, Al Sabbri M. Prevalence, Recognition, and Risk Factors of Constipation among Medically Hospitalized Patients: A Cohort Prospective Study. Medicina. 2023; 59(7):1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59071347

Chicago/Turabian Style

Al Nou’mani, Jawahar, Abdullah M. Al Alawi, Juhaina Salim Al-Maqbali, Nahid Al Abri, and Maryam Al Sabbri. 2023. "Prevalence, Recognition, and Risk Factors of Constipation among Medically Hospitalized Patients: A Cohort Prospective Study" Medicina 59, no. 7: 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59071347

APA Style

Al Nou’mani, J., Al Alawi, A. M., Al-Maqbali, J. S., Al Abri, N., & Al Sabbri, M. (2023). Prevalence, Recognition, and Risk Factors of Constipation among Medically Hospitalized Patients: A Cohort Prospective Study. Medicina, 59(7), 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59071347

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop