Defining constipation to estimate its prevalence in the community: Results from a national survey

Werth, BL; Williams, KA; Fisher, MJ; Pont, LG

Defining constipation to estimate its prevalence in the community: Results from a national survey

Werth, BL

Williams, KA

Fisher, MJ Pont, LG

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: BMC Gastroenterology, 2019, 19 (1)
Issue Date:: 2019-05-21

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published VersionAdobe PDF (574.65 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Werth, BL https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2040-3707	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Williams, KA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5094-243X	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Fisher, MJ	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Pont, LG https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8545-716X	en_US
dc.date.available	2019-05-09	en_US
dc.date.issued	2019-05-21	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	BMC Gastroenterology, 2019, 19 (1)	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/134734
dc.description.abstract	© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Different definitions of constipation have been used to estimate its prevalence in the community but this creates difficulties when comparing results from various studies. This study explores the impact of different definitions on prevalence estimates in the same population and compares the performance of simple definitions with the Rome III criteria. Methods: The prevalence of constipation in a large nationally representative sample of community-dwelling adults was estimated using five simple definitions of constipation and compared with definitions based on the Rome III criteria. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, were calculated for each definition using the Rome III criteria as the gold standards for chronic and sub-chronic constipation. Results: Prevalence estimates for the five simple definitions ranged from 9.4 to 58.9%, while the prevalence estimates using the Rome III criteria were 24.0% (95%CI: 22.1, 25.9) for chronic constipation and 39.6% (95%CI: 37.5, 41.7) for sub-chronic constipation. None of the simple definitions were adequate compared to the Rome III criteria. Self-reported constipation over the past 12 months had the highest sensitivity (91.1%, 95%CI: 88.8, 93.4) and negative predictive value (94.5%, 95%CI: 93.1, 96.1) compared to the Rome III criteria for chronic constipation but an unacceptably low specificity (51.3%, 95%CI: 48.8, 53.8) and positive predictive value (37.1%, 95%CI: 34.4, 39.9). Conclusions: The definition used to identify constipation within a population has a considerable impact on the prevalence estimate obtained. Simple definitions, commonly used in research, performed poorly compared with the Rome III criteria. Studies estimating population prevalence of constipation should use definitions based on the Rome criteria where possible.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	BMC Gastroenterology	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1186/s12876-019-0994-0	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Gastroenterology & Hepatology	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Adolescent	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Adult	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Aged	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Australia	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Constipation	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Female	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Male	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Middle Aged	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Predictive Value of Tests	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Prevalence	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Self Report	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Young Adult	en_US
dc.title	Defining constipation to estimate its prevalence in the community: Results from a national survey	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	19	en_US
utslib.for	1103 Clinical Sciences	en_US
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Graduate School of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHSP - Health Services and Practice
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	19	en_US

Abstract:

© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Different definitions of constipation have been used to estimate its prevalence in the community but this creates difficulties when comparing results from various studies. This study explores the impact of different definitions on prevalence estimates in the same population and compares the performance of simple definitions with the Rome III criteria. Methods: The prevalence of constipation in a large nationally representative sample of community-dwelling adults was estimated using five simple definitions of constipation and compared with definitions based on the Rome III criteria. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, were calculated for each definition using the Rome III criteria as the gold standards for chronic and sub-chronic constipation. Results: Prevalence estimates for the five simple definitions ranged from 9.4 to 58.9%, while the prevalence estimates using the Rome III criteria were 24.0% (95%CI: 22.1, 25.9) for chronic constipation and 39.6% (95%CI: 37.5, 41.7) for sub-chronic constipation. None of the simple definitions were adequate compared to the Rome III criteria. Self-reported constipation over the past 12 months had the highest sensitivity (91.1%, 95%CI: 88.8, 93.4) and negative predictive value (94.5%, 95%CI: 93.1, 96.1) compared to the Rome III criteria for chronic constipation but an unacceptably low specificity (51.3%, 95%CI: 48.8, 53.8) and positive predictive value (37.1%, 95%CI: 34.4, 39.9). Conclusions: The definition used to identify constipation within a population has a considerable impact on the prevalence estimate obtained. Simple definitions, commonly used in research, performed poorly compared with the Rome III criteria. Studies estimating population prevalence of constipation should use definitions based on the Rome criteria where possible.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/134734