Title: Prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives, and association with risk factors among
older patients during hospitalization. A cross sectional study
Version: 0 Date: 29 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a very interesting paper dealing with the prevalence of constipation and the use of
laxatives among older hospitalized patients
Line 21“Many older patients’ experience constipation..”: without apostrophe
Line 51 “To enhance the quality of care in relation to the bowel health of older patients’..”:
without apostrophe
Line 56  Despite being a common condition among older patient’s > patients
Line 90 Nursing diagnosis of constipation, as an actual or a potential health problem, are defined
… > probably “is”
Line 142: The authors should better explain what they mean for “altered functional status”
Line 153: The authors should highlight that they used “three different data sources… in order
to reach as complete a description as possible” as a limitation of the present study
Lines 215-218. The authors should better explain their interesting finding that  only “…18
patients (6%) had received an ICD-10 diagnosis of constipation” whereas , “from progress
notes written by RNs and physicians’ regarding signs and symptoms, 199 patients (65%) had
symptoms of constipation”.
Line 221: I am not so sure that nausea could be included among the characterizing features of
constipation
Line 227: Among stimulants did the authors include also prokinetics and secretagogues?
Lines 303-305: “This finding indicates that comorbid health conditions may have a lower impact
on the development of constipation. However, in contrast, a previous review reported that
underlying medical conditions were one of the most common risk factors for constipation”  The
authors should better explain these concepts
Line 306: Were PAMORAs prescriped in no patients treated with opioids?
In the Introduction and also in the discussion, when the authors deal with the different definition
of chronic constipation and the self-diagnosed constipation they could profitably use the
paper by Bellini et al. “Different perception of chronic constipation between patients and
gastroenterologists”  NGM 2018.
Title: Prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives, and association with risk factors among
older patients during hospitalization. A cross sectional study
Version: 0 Date: 29 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a very interesting paper dealing with the prevalence of constipation and the use of
laxatives among older hospitalized patients
Line 21“Many older patients’ experience constipation..”: without apostrophe
Line 51 “To enhance the quality of care in relation to the bowel health of older patients’..”:
without apostrophe
Line 56  Despite being a common condition among older patient’s > patients
Line 90 Nursing diagnosis of constipation, as an actual or a potential health problem, are defined
… > probably “is”
Line 142: The authors should better explain what they mean for “altered functional status”
Line 153: The authors should highlight that they used “three different data sources… in order
to reach as complete a description as possible” as a limitation of the present study
Lines 215-218. The authors should better explain their interesting finding that  only “…18
patients (6%) had received an ICD-10 diagnosis of constipation” whereas , “from progress
notes written by RNs and physicians’ regarding signs and symptoms, 199 patients (65%) had
symptoms of constipation”.
Line 221: I am not so sure that nausea could be included among the characterizing features of
constipation
Line 227: Among stimulants did the authors include also prokinetics and secretagogues?
Lines 303-305: “This finding indicates that comorbid health conditions may have a lower impact
on the development of constipation. However, in contrast, a previous review reported that
underlying medical conditions were one of the most common risk factors for constipation”  The
authors should better explain these concepts
Line 306: Were PAMORAs prescriped in no patients treated with opioids?
In the Introduction and also in the discussion, when the authors deal with the different definition
of chronic constipation and the self-diagnosed constipation they could profitably use the
paper by Bellini et al. “Different perception of chronic constipation between patients and
gastroenterologists”  NGM 2018.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives, and association with risk factors among
older patients during hospitalization. A cross sectional study
Version: 0 Date: 29 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a very interesting paper dealing with the prevalence of constipation and the use of
laxatives among older hospitalized patients
Line 21“Many older patients’ experience constipation..”: without apostrophe
Line 51 “To enhance the quality of care in relation to the bowel health of older patients’..”:
without apostrophe
Line 56  Despite being a common condition among older patient’s > patients
Line 90 Nursing diagnosis of constipation, as an actual or a potential health problem, are defined
… > probably “is”
Line 142: The authors should better explain what they mean for “altered functional status”
Line 153: The authors should highlight that they used “three different data sources… in order
to reach as complete a description as possible” as a limitation of the present study
Lines 215-218. The authors should better explain their interesting finding that  only “…18
patients (6%) had received an ICD-10 diagnosis of constipation” whereas , “from progress
notes written by RNs and physicians’ regarding signs and symptoms, 199 patients (65%) had
symptoms of constipation”.
Line 221: I am not so sure that nausea could be included among the characterizing features of
constipation
Line 227: Among stimulants did the authors include also prokinetics and secretagogues?
Lines 303-305: “This finding indicates that comorbid health conditions may have a lower impact
on the development of constipation. However, in contrast, a previous review reported that
underlying medical conditions were one of the most common risk factors for constipation”  The
authors should better explain these concepts
Line 306: Were PAMORAs prescriped in no patients treated with opioids?
In the Introduction and also in the discussion, when the authors deal with the different definition
of chronic constipation and the self-diagnosed constipation they could profitably use the
paper by Bellini et al. “Different perception of chronic constipation between patients and
gastroenterologists”  NGM 2018.
assistant