Harari D, Gurwitz J H, Minaker K L
Division on Aging, Harvard Medical School, West Roxbury, Massachusetts.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993 Oct;41(10):1130-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb06463.x.
To explore the distinction between true clinical constipation and the subjective complaint of constipation in elderly people and to review the pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnosis, causes, and treatment.
A computer-assisted and manual search of the English language literature using MEDLINE 1966-1991, Index Medicus 1988-1992, reference lists of selected articles, and relevant textbooks.
Studies that provide information on lower bowel function and laxative and enema use in the elderly subjects were reviewed. Article selection was not limited by study design.
Relevant data were abstracted from the results of physiological, cohort and case-control studies, and clinical trials. The text discusses the methodological strengths and flaws of these studies and excludes management approaches formulated from uncontrolled clinical observation.
Constipation of the elderly is not well defined in the current literature. Self-reported constipation and laxative use increase with age, while a similar escalation in true clinical constipation is not shown. Physiological changes in the lower bowel predisposing toward constipation do not occur with normal aging. Patient selection criteria for studies examining the pathophysiology of constipation differ in their definition of constipation and their inclusion of coexisting chronic illness. Nevertheless, there is consistent evidence for prolonged transit through the sigmoid colon and rectum, especially in frail elderly patients, and reduced rectal tone with impaired sensation, particularly in patients with rectal impaction. Few studies rigorously examine "risk factors" and non-pharmacological interventions in constipation. The results of most laxative trials require cautious interpretation because of inclusion of patients without diagnostically proven constipation, use of combined laxative preparations, and unreliable outcome measures. Certain laxative agents however appear more appropriate for use in elderly people.
Although the subjective complaint of constipation and habitual laxative use increase with age, the epidemiological data suggest that true clinical constipation does not. Physiological changes predisposing toward constipation are not an inevitable consequence of aging, but appear to be specific to the condition. The available data do not confirm many suspected "risk factors" nor the benefits of commonly used non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, but they do provide enough information to formulate a practical approach to constipation in elderly persons.
探讨老年人真正的临床便秘与便秘主观主诉之间的区别,并综述其病理生理学、症状、诊断、病因及治疗。
使用1966 - 1991年的MEDLINE、1988 - 1992年的《医学索引》对英文文献进行计算机辅助及手工检索,查阅所选文章的参考文献列表及相关教科书。
对提供老年受试者下消化道功能以及泻药和灌肠剂使用信息的研究进行综述。文章选择不受研究设计限制。
从生理学、队列研究、病例对照研究及临床试验结果中提取相关数据。本文讨论了这些研究的方法学优点和缺陷,并排除了基于非对照临床观察制定的管理方法。
目前文献中对老年便秘的定义并不明确。自我报告的便秘和泻药使用随年龄增加,而真正的临床便秘未见类似增加。正常衰老过程中下消化道倾向于便秘的生理变化并未出现。研究便秘病理生理学的患者选择标准在便秘的定义及其对并存慢性病的纳入方面存在差异。然而,有一致证据表明乙状结肠和直肠转运时间延长,尤其是在体弱的老年患者中,直肠张力降低且感觉受损,特别是在直肠嵌塞患者中。很少有研究严格考察便秘的“危险因素”和非药物干预措施。由于纳入了未确诊便秘的患者、使用联合泻药制剂以及结果测量不可靠,大多数泻药试验的结果需要谨慎解读。然而,某些泻药似乎更适合老年人使用。
虽然便秘的主观主诉和习惯性泻药使用随年龄增加,但流行病学数据表明真正的临床便秘并非如此。倾向于便秘的生理变化不是衰老的必然结果,而是似乎特定于该病症。现有数据未证实许多可疑的“危险因素”,也未证实常用非药物和药物治疗的益处,但确实提供了足够信息来制定针对老年人便秘的实用方法。