4.2 Article

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Chronic Constipation Among Women Aged 50 Years and Older in Shanghai, China

Journal

MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR
Volume 23, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

INT SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION, INC
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.904040

Keywords

Constipation; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Women

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai [201440351, ZK2015A32]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Chronic constipation (CC) is a major public health problem worldwide, especially in elderly women. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of CC among women aged 50 years and older in Shanghai, China. Material/Method: A crosssectional survey was conducted on 1950 women aged 50 years and older, randomly sampled in Yangpu District of Shanghai from April to October 2015. Information on demographic characteristics, lifestyle habits, medical history, and defecation situation was collected through in person interviews. CC was defined according to Rome III criteria. The data were analyzed by chi square test and multiple logistic regression analysis. Results: The response rate to the survey was 80.4%. Of the 1568 participants, 77 were diagnosed with CC, with a prevalence of 4.9%. Moreover, the prevalence increased with advancing age. Multiple logistic analyses showed that body mass index (BMI) >= 25.0 kg/m(2), non manual occupation, premenopausal period, no delivery history, poor sleep quality, meat based diet, and less physical exercise were significant risk factors for CC in the population of women aged 50 years and older. Conclusions: CC was a common health problem among women aged 50 years and older in Shanghai, and the prevalence was positively associated with BMI >= 25.0 kg/m(2), non manual occupation, premenopausal period, no delivery history, poor sleep quality, meat based diet, and less physical exercise. Further studies are needed to identify the risk factors and potential interventions for CC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available