Background: Evaluate prevalence of functional constipation (FC) and irritable bowel syndrome-constipation (IBS-C) in Indian constipated patients and assess their demographic/socio-economic/clinical characteristics.Methods: Patients (≥18 years) who visited their general physician with symptoms of constipation (Rome III criteria for FC or IBS-C as per physician assessment) and willing to participate were enrolled in this prospective, clinical-epidemiological study. Demographic, socioeconomic status, lifestyle and dietary habits, comorbid conditions, treatment history, concomitant medications, stool form (Bristol stool form scale), severity of constipation (constipation scoring system [CSS]), constipation-related symptoms (patient assessment of constipation symptoms [PAC-SYM]) and quality of life (patient assessment of constipation-quality of life questionnaire [PAC-QoL]) were recorded.Results: Out of 925 constipated patients, 75.6% were diagnosed with FC against 24.4% with IBS-C (P < 0.0001). Patients of both subtypes had high average scores of PAC-SYM (FC: 27.1 ± 6; IBS-C: 30.1 ± 4.9) and CSS (FC: 8.4 ± 3.1; IBS-C: 11.2 ± 3), leading to high PAC-QoL score (FC: 38.1 ± 16.8; IBS-C: 42.2 ± 13.6). Hypertension (16%) and diabetes (10%) in patients with FC while acid peptic disorders (21.7%) amongst IBS-C patients were the most common comorbid conditions observed. Laxatives were the most common medication used; osmotic (32.6% versus 40.7%) and bulk laxatives (22.8% versus 37.4%) were the commonest laxatives. However, about 1/5th patients of FC were using home remedies.Conclusions: There was a higher prevalence of FC over IBS-C in Indian constipated patients; both subtypes had high frequency and severity of constipation-related symptoms and poor QoL.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.