Open AccessThe Association Between Constipation and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Parous Middle-Aged Women: A Prospective Cohort Study
Author(s) -
Nour Alhababi,
Maria C. Magnus,
Marcus Drake,
Abigail Fraser,
Carol Joinson
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of women's health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.195
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1931-843X
pISSN - 1540-9996
DOI - 10.1089/jwh.2020.8624
Subject(s) - medicine , nocturia , lower urinary tract symptoms , constipation , relative risk , prospective cohort study , confidence interval , urinary incontinence , gynecology , obstetrics , urinary system , urology , prostate , cancer
Objective: To examine the prospective association between constipation and risk of developing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in parous middle-aged women. Materials and Methods: The study uses data from 3,729 women from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children who provided self-reports of medication intake for constipation at two time points (Baseline): 2001–2003 and 2003–2005. Women with LUTS at baseline were excluded. After 10 years of follow-up, women provided self-reports of LUTS using an adapted version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire on Female LUTS. LUTS were categorized according to International Continence Society definitions as stress urinary incontinence (UI), urgency UI, mixed UI, nocturia, increased daytime frequency, urgency, hesitancy, and intermittency. LUTS were considered present if symptoms were reported to occur at least “sometimes” for all subtypes, except for increased daytime frequency (≥9 times) and nocturia (≥2 times nightly). Results: At follow-up, the prevalence of any LUTS was 40%. Women (mean age 43.3 years, standard deviation 0.5), who took medication for constipation at either time point had increased risks of urgency (adjusted relative risks [RRs] = 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04–1.95) and hesitancy (adjusted RR = 1.72; 95% CI 1.04–3.01) compared with women who reported not using medication for constipation at either time point. The risk of urgency (adjusted RR = 1.94; 95% CI 1.15–3.29) and hesitancy (adjusted RR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.03–4.19) was greater for women who reported taking medication for constipation at both time points. There was no evidence that constipation was associated with stress UI, urgency UI, mixed UI, nocturia, increased daytime frequency, and intermittency. Conclusion: Constipation is prospectively associated with an increased risk of urgency and hesitancy among parous middle-aged women. If further research finds evidence that this association is causal, this implies that women should seek treatment to alleviate constipation to reduce their consequent risk of developing these LUTS.