Epidemiology of slow and fast colonic transit using a scale of stool form in a community

R. S. Choung, G. R. Locke, A. R. Zinsmeister, C. D. Schleck, N. J. Talley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Measurement of gastrointestinal transit is commonly performed in the clinic, but data on transit in the community are lacking. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of slow and fast colonic transit using stool form, and potential risk factors. Methods: A validated self-reported gastrointestinal symptom questionnaire was mailed to 4196 randomly selected members of the community (response rate 54%). One question asked the subject to self-report their stool form using the Bristol Stool Scale. Results: Overall, 18%, 9% and 73% met stool form criteria for slow, fast or normal colonic transit, respectively. Increased odds for slow transit were observed with a higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 1.6; 1.3-2.0), while a decreased odds for slow transit was observed in males relative to females (OR = 0.6; 0.5-0.8). An increased odds for fast transit was observed with higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 2.3; 1.7-2.9) and a history of cholecystectomy (OR = 1.8; 1.2-2.8). Increasing body mass index (per 5 units) was associated with decreased odds for slow (OR = 0.85; 0.78-0.93), and an increased odds for fast (OR = 1.1; 1.04-1.24) colonic transit. Conclusion: Based on stool form assessment, nearly one in five community members may have slow colonic transit and one in 12 have accelerated colonic transit.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1043-1050
Number of pages8
JournalAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Volume26
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2007

Fingerprint

Epidemiology
Checklist
Gastrointestinal Transit
Cholecystectomy
Self Report
Body Mass Index
Medically Unexplained Symptoms
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Cite this

Epidemiology of slow and fast colonic transit using a scale of stool form in a community. / Choung, R. S.; Locke, G. R.; Zinsmeister, A. R.; Schleck, C. D.; Talley, N. J.

In: Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vol. 26, No. 7, 10.2007, p. 1043-1050.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Choung, R. S. ; Locke, G. R. ; Zinsmeister, A. R. ; Schleck, C. D. ; Talley, N. J. / Epidemiology of slow and fast colonic transit using a scale of stool form in a community. In: Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2007 ; Vol. 26, No. 7. pp. 1043-1050.
@article{37a2fbdfd2a4405192ae97633df33f4b,
title = "Epidemiology of slow and fast colonic transit using a scale of stool form in a community",
abstract = "Background: Measurement of gastrointestinal transit is commonly performed in the clinic, but data on transit in the community are lacking. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of slow and fast colonic transit using stool form, and potential risk factors. Methods: A validated self-reported gastrointestinal symptom questionnaire was mailed to 4196 randomly selected members of the community (response rate 54{\%}). One question asked the subject to self-report their stool form using the Bristol Stool Scale. Results: Overall, 18{\%}, 9{\%} and 73{\%} met stool form criteria for slow, fast or normal colonic transit, respectively. Increased odds for slow transit were observed with a higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 1.6; 1.3-2.0), while a decreased odds for slow transit was observed in males relative to females (OR = 0.6; 0.5-0.8). An increased odds for fast transit was observed with higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 2.3; 1.7-2.9) and a history of cholecystectomy (OR = 1.8; 1.2-2.8). Increasing body mass index (per 5 units) was associated with decreased odds for slow (OR = 0.85; 0.78-0.93), and an increased odds for fast (OR = 1.1; 1.04-1.24) colonic transit. Conclusion: Based on stool form assessment, nearly one in five community members may have slow colonic transit and one in 12 have accelerated colonic transit.",
author = "Choung, {R. S.} and Locke, {G. R.} and Zinsmeister, {A. R.} and Schleck, {C. D.} and Talley, {N. J.}",
year = "2007",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03456.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "1043--1050",
journal = "Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics",
issn = "0269-2813",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Epidemiology of slow and fast colonic transit using a scale of stool form in a community

AU - Choung, R. S.

AU - Locke, G. R.

AU - Zinsmeister, A. R.

AU - Schleck, C. D.

AU - Talley, N. J.

PY - 2007/10

Y1 - 2007/10

N2 - Background: Measurement of gastrointestinal transit is commonly performed in the clinic, but data on transit in the community are lacking. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of slow and fast colonic transit using stool form, and potential risk factors. Methods: A validated self-reported gastrointestinal symptom questionnaire was mailed to 4196 randomly selected members of the community (response rate 54%). One question asked the subject to self-report their stool form using the Bristol Stool Scale. Results: Overall, 18%, 9% and 73% met stool form criteria for slow, fast or normal colonic transit, respectively. Increased odds for slow transit were observed with a higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 1.6; 1.3-2.0), while a decreased odds for slow transit was observed in males relative to females (OR = 0.6; 0.5-0.8). An increased odds for fast transit was observed with higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 2.3; 1.7-2.9) and a history of cholecystectomy (OR = 1.8; 1.2-2.8). Increasing body mass index (per 5 units) was associated with decreased odds for slow (OR = 0.85; 0.78-0.93), and an increased odds for fast (OR = 1.1; 1.04-1.24) colonic transit. Conclusion: Based on stool form assessment, nearly one in five community members may have slow colonic transit and one in 12 have accelerated colonic transit.

AB - Background: Measurement of gastrointestinal transit is commonly performed in the clinic, but data on transit in the community are lacking. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of slow and fast colonic transit using stool form, and potential risk factors. Methods: A validated self-reported gastrointestinal symptom questionnaire was mailed to 4196 randomly selected members of the community (response rate 54%). One question asked the subject to self-report their stool form using the Bristol Stool Scale. Results: Overall, 18%, 9% and 73% met stool form criteria for slow, fast or normal colonic transit, respectively. Increased odds for slow transit were observed with a higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 1.6; 1.3-2.0), while a decreased odds for slow transit was observed in males relative to females (OR = 0.6; 0.5-0.8). An increased odds for fast transit was observed with higher Somatic Symptom Checklist score (OR = 2.3; 1.7-2.9) and a history of cholecystectomy (OR = 1.8; 1.2-2.8). Increasing body mass index (per 5 units) was associated with decreased odds for slow (OR = 0.85; 0.78-0.93), and an increased odds for fast (OR = 1.1; 1.04-1.24) colonic transit. Conclusion: Based on stool form assessment, nearly one in five community members may have slow colonic transit and one in 12 have accelerated colonic transit.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548701573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548701573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03456.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03456.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 17877511

AN - SCOPUS:34548701573

VL - 26

SP - 1043

EP - 1050

JO - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

JF - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

SN - 0269-2813

IS - 7

ER -