Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prevalence of anal incontinence according to age and gender: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Anal incontinence is increasingly being recognised as a significant cause of physical and psychological morbidity with implications for healthcare provision within the community. There is controversy about which population groups are most disadvantaged by this chronic condition.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of this condition in the community according to age and gender, a systematic review was performed. Data sources: Data were from Embase, Medline, bibliographies of known articles and contact with experts.

Study selection

Studies were selected if data on anal incontinence could be extracted for participants over 15 years of age and living in the community.

Data extraction

Data were extracted using a piloted form on participants' characteristics, study quality and incontinence rates.

Data synthesis

Meta-analysis was used to combine data from multiple studies, and meta-regression evaluated the variation in rates according to age and gender in an analysis adjusted for study quality.

Results

There were 29 studies (69,152 participants), of which 5 met over half of the high quality criteria. The rate of solid and liquid faecal incontinence among people aged 15–60 years was 0.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3–1.9] in men and 1.6% (95% CI 0.8–3.1) in women. In those aged over 60, this increased to 5.1% (95% CI 3.4–7.6) in men and 6.2% (95% CI 4.9–8.0) in women. Meta-regression showed that age had a significant influence on rates of solid and liquid faecal incontinence (p=0.007), but not gender (p=0.368) or study quality (p=0.085).

Conclusions

The rate of solid and liquid faecal incontinence in older people is significantly higher than their younger counterparts. Gender differences in rates did not reach statistical significance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Norton C, Christiansen J, Butler U, Harari D, Nelson R, Pemberton JH et al (2002) Anal incontinence. In: Abrams P, Cordozo L, Khoury SE, Wein AJ (eds) Incontinence—report of the second World Health Organisation international consultation on incontinence. Publication Ltd., Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gilleard CJ (1980) Prevalence of incontinence in local authority homes for the elderly. Health Bull 38:236–238

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jagger C, Clarke M, Davies RA (1986) The elderly at home: indices of disability. J Epidemiol Community Health 40:139–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brocklehurst JC (1972) The problems in old age. Proc Roy Soc Med 65:66–69

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Diokno AC, Brock BM, Herzog AR, Bromberg J (1990) Medical correlates of urinary incontinence in the elderly. Urology 36:129–138

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Drossman DA, Li Z, Andruzzi E, Temple RD, Talley NJ, Thompson WG, Whitehead WE, Janssens J, Funch-Jensen P, Corazziari E, Richter JE, Koch GG (1993) U.S. householder survey of functional gastrointestinal disorders: prevalence, sociodemography, and health impact. Dig Dis Sci 38:1569–1580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Edwards NI, Jones D (2001) The prevalence of faecal incontinence in older people living at home. Age Ageing 30:503–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Roche B, Chautems R, Rakotoarimanana R, Deleaval J, Berclaz O, Marti M-C (2002) Epidemiologie de l'incontinence anale. Rev Med Suisse Romande 122:71–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Enck P, Bielefeldt K, Rathmann W, Purrmann J, Tschope D, Erckenbrecht JF (1991) Epidemiology of faecal incontinence in selected patient groups. Int J Colorectal Dis 6:143–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lam TCF, Kennedy ML, Chen FC, Lubowski DZ, Talley NJ (1999) Prevalence of faecal incontinence: obstetric and constipation-related risk factors: a population-based study. Colorectal Dis 1:197–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. MacLennan AH, Taylor AW, Wilson DH, Wilson D (2000) The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders and their relationship to gender, age, parity and mode of delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 107:1460–1470

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. McKibbon A, Eady A, Marks S (1999) Identifying and selecting studies for inclusion. PDQ evidence-based principles and practice. BC Dekker, Hamilton, pp 125–127

    Google Scholar 

  13. Glasziou P, Irwig L, Bain C, Colditz G (2001) Using the quality appraisal. Syst Rev Health Care Part 1:27–29

    Google Scholar 

  14. Glasziou P, Irwig L, Bain C, Colditz G (2001) Frequency and rate. Syst Rev Health Care Part 2:67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Streiner DL, Norman GR (1995) Health measurement scales. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  16. Laird NM, Mosteller F (1990) Some statistical methods for combining experimental results. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 6:5–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. DerSimonian R, Laird NM (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Eva UF, Gun W, Preben K (2003) Prevalence of urinary and fecal incontiennce and symptoms of genital prolapse in women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 82:280–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Faltin D, Sangalli MR, Curtin F, Morabia A, Weil A (2001) Prevalence of anal incontinence and other anorectal symptoms in women. Int Urogynecol J 12:117–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. O'Keefe EA, Talley NJ, Zinsmeister AR, Jacobsen SJ (1995) Bowel disorders impair functional status and quality of life in the elderly: a population-based study. J Gerontol 50A:M184–M189

    Google Scholar 

  22. Roberts RO, Jacobsen SJ, Reilly WT, Pemberton JH, Lieber MM, Talley NJ (1999) Prevalence of combined fecal and urinary incontience community-based study. J Am Geriatr Soc 47:837–841

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Walter S, Hallbook O, Gotthard R, Bergmark M, Sjodhal R (2002) A population-based study on bowel habits in a Swedish community: prevalence of faecal incontinence and constipation. Scand J Gastroenterol 8:911–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. JAMA 283

  25. Deeks J, Khan KS, Song F, Popay J, Nixon J, Kleijnen J (2001) Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination 4:9

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Thomas JM, Bartram CI (1993) Anal sphincter disruption during vaginal delivery. N Engl J Med 329:1905–1911

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Mary Publicover, Librarian, Birmingham Women's Hospital, for the written permission to submit this article and for her advice on the search strategy; Augustus Newman Fund from Royal College of Surgeons and Research and Development Committee at Birmingham Women's Hospital.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Birmingham Women's Hospital, Metchley Park Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TG, UK

    S. J. Pretlove, P. M. Toozs-Hobson, P. J. Thompson, A. Coomarasamy & K. S. Khan

  2. Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH, UK

    S. Radley

Authors
  1. S. J. Pretlove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Radley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. M. Toozs-Hobson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. J. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Coomarasamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K. S. Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. J. Pretlove.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

192_2005_14_MOESM1_ESM.doc

192_2005_14_MOESM2_ESM.doc

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pretlove, S.J., Radley, S., Toozs-Hobson, P.M. et al. Prevalence of anal incontinence according to age and gender: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Int Urogynecol J 17, 407–417 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-005-0014-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-005-0014-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation