Interactive Textbook on Clinical Symptom Research Logo


Home Button

Clinical Research: Constipation Sections
Author Biography
Introduction
What is constipation?
Currently Selected Section: Understanding the problem
Objective Measurement
Subjective Measurement
Measuring Components
Precipitating Factors
Therapeutic Comparisons
Research Questions
Conclusion




Chapter 3: Methods for Clinical Research in Constipation: Understanding the Extent of the Problem
         

The prevalence and severity of constipation will vary in different clinical populations. Several large, questionnaire-based epidemiological surveys of constipation in healthy people exist (Connell et al., 1965; Drossman et al., 1982; Everhart et al., 1989; Zuckerman et al., 1995) and serve as a basis for comparison for results obtained in groups with one or another type of pathology.

A popular method of assessing the extent of constipation in a particular clinical area is the retrospective chart review. This may look at either:

  • Recording of complaints by patients and professionals’ impressions of constipation, or
  • Laxative prescribing and the use of enemas and suppositories as proxies respectively for the presence of constipation and the success of treatment.

Such an approach is simple to use but has evident difficulties of completeness and interpretation that compromise its accuracy. It is, however, considerably better than no audit at all of constipation and its management.

For example, Twycross has reported three reviews of constipation management performed in the same palliative care unit.

Table 3.1

A survey of 200 patients followed for six weeks or until death looked at the requirement for rectal interventions (suppository, enema or manual evacuation).

  • 75% of patients required such intervention during the first week after admission, and
  • 40% continued to do so in subsequent weeks despite an increasing rate of laxative prescription.

The laxative use of 260 patients was reviewed from admission to death. To avoid a misleadingly low result because of very ill individuals, those admitted less than four days prior to death were excluded.

  • 78% received a regular laxative, and
  • 4% received an antidiarrheal.

The laxative use of 100 consecutive patients who had been admitted for over 10 days was reviewed after stratification for opioid use.

  • 83% of patients taking morphine or diamorphine received laxatives, but so did
  • 61% of those on no opioids at all; they received laxatives.

 

Page 5 of 36
       Previous Section