Estudo de prevalência de constipação intestinal funcional em mulheres atendidas no Hospital Universitário Antonio Pedro, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro

Contém tabelas e gráficosConstipação está entre os distúrbios gastrointestinais mais comuns. É mais comum em mulheres e apesar do seu impacto significativo, critérios objetivos são necessários para definir a constipação a fim de examinar a sua epidemiologia de forma consistente ... O uso de dois critérios clínicos quantitativos parece ser benéfico para esclarecimento da epidemiologia da constipação e parece facilitar a identificação de pessoas que estão sob maior risco de desenvolver esta condição.Constipation is among the most common gastrointestinal disorders. It’s more common in women and despite its significant impact, objective criteria are necessary to define constipation in order to examine its epidemiology in a consistent manner. The aim of this study was to calculate the prevalence of functional constipation in women volunteers, that were selected among patients treated at the University Hospital Antonio Pedro in Outpatients Gynecology Unit, from January 2012 to December 2013. The women patients those who had a history of organic diseases of GI tract and history of gastrointestinal operation other than simple appendicectomy or simple cholecystectomy were excluded. The two quantitative abnormalities of Rome III Criteria for functional constipation diagnosis were used: frequency of bowel movements (<3 bowel movements per week) and differences in stool form (Bristol Stool Scale). Results: A total of 375 female patients were included with the average age of 61,1 (±18.9) years. The number of patients with <3 bowel movements per week was 69 [group I (GI) – 18,4%; mean age of 54,5 (±18,2%)] and 306 volunteers related ≥ 3 bowel movements per week [(group II (GII) – 81,6%; mean age 53,9 (± 20,4)]. Fifty one (73,9%) of the GI and 76 (24,8%) of the GII patients presented Bristol Stool Form value < 3. The mean value of stool form types was 2,63 ± 1,33 in the GI and 3,15 ± 1,20 in the GII. We found significant differences between the two groups in the number of volunteers with Bristol Stool Form value <3 (OR – 8.575; 95%CI – 4.72 to 15.57, p<0,01) and in the mean value of stool form types (OR – 11.25; 95%CI – 6.22 to 20.36, p