How Common Is Constipation? Prevalence by the Numbers

Roughly one in eight people worldwide has functional constipation at any given time, making it one of the most common digestive complaints on the planet. A 2025 meta-analysis pooling studies across all age groups estimated the global prevalence at about 12%, with numbers shifting depending on the population studied and the diagnostic criteria applied.¹ That figure, while already large, almost certainly understates the problem, because many people with constipation never bring it up with a doctor and many more do not recognize what they experience as constipation in the first place.

The Global Numbers and Why They Vary

The headline prevalence of constipation depends heavily on how you define it. Researchers have long used a standardized set of diagnostic criteria called the Rome criteria, which have been updated several times. A 2021 systematic review in The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology found that studies using the older Rome I criteria reported a prevalence of about 15%, while those using the most current Rome IV criteria came in at roughly 10%.² The criteria have grown stricter over time, which partly explains the drop. When studies ask people whether they consider themselves constipated, without applying any formal definition, numbers can range anywhere from 2% to 27%.³

A useful way to think about it: if you picture a room of 100 adults drawn from the general population, somewhere between 10 and 15 of them are dealing with functional constipation right now, depending on which measuring stick you use. That is only the chronic or recurring kind. Occasional constipation, the sort that hits after travel or a change in routine, adds still more people to the total. A study looking specifically at “occasional constipation” using Rome IV criteria found it affected an additional 4% to 16% of people depending on the region, on top of those with the chronic form.⁴

Women Are Affected About Twice as Often as Men

Every large review on the subject finds that women report constipation at roughly double the rate men do. The 2025 meta-analysis estimated prevalence at about 15% in women and 11% in men.¹ The 2021 Lancet review found odds ratios for women ranging from about 1.9 to 2.4 across different Rome versions, meaning women were consistently about twice as likely to meet the criteria.² A European survey found the gap in starker terms: about 20% of women versus 11% of men.⁵

Why the sex difference exists is not entirely settled. Hormonal influences on gut motility, particularly progesterone’s slowing effect on smooth muscle contractions, likely play a role. The pelvic anatomy differences between men and women also matter, as conditions like pelvic floor dysfunction disproportionately affect women. And the gap widens during pregnancy, which deserves its own discussion.

Constipation Across the Age Spectrum

Age is one of the strongest predictors. The same 2025 meta-analysis broke prevalence down by age group and found the highest rates in older adults, at about 20%, followed by children at about 12%, with working-age adults at the lowest rate of roughly 10%.¹ A separate meta-analysis focused specifically on older adults arrived at a similar figure of about 19%.⁶

In nursing homes and long-term care facilities, the numbers jump sharply. One Norwegian study found constipation symptoms in about 36% of nursing home residents, rising to 40% when the same facilities were surveyed again six years later.⁷ The combination of reduced mobility, multiple medications, lower fluid intake, and age-related slowing of gut motility creates a perfect storm. Elderly women remain at higher risk than elderly men, extending the sex disparity seen in younger populations.⁸

Children

Constipation in children is surprisingly common and often underappreciated. Using Rome IV criteria, the pooled global prevalence in children is about 14%.⁹ Reported rates vary widely by study, from under 1% to nearly 30%, depending on the population and how the question is asked.¹⁰ Pediatric constipation often begins around toilet training and can become a self-reinforcing cycle: a child who has a painful bowel movement starts holding it in, which makes the next one harder, which increases avoidance further.

Pregnancy and Postpartum

Pregnancy substantially increases the risk. One study estimated constipation prevalence at about 24% in the first trimester, 26% in the second, and 16% in the third.¹¹ A more recent observational study found even higher rates, with about 40% of pregnant women and 52% of postpartum women affected, compared to 21% in age-matched non-pregnant controls.¹² The postpartum spike is particularly notable: constipation was worse after cesarean delivery (about 57%) than after vaginal delivery (about 47%), though it resolved for most women within a month.¹²

The Gap Between Having Constipation and Knowing It

One of the more striking findings in the prevalence literature is how poorly self-perception tracks with clinical diagnosis. A study that compared self-reported constipation with Rome IV criteria found that among people who said they were not constipated, about 29% actually met the clinical definition. Meanwhile, 94% of those who considered themselves constipated did meet the criteria, which at least shows that self-diagnosis skews in one direction more than the other.¹³ This means nearly a third of the “non-constipated” population could actually qualify for a constipation diagnosis. Many people assume that having a bowel movement every few days is just their normal, and they never think to mention it to a doctor.

This perception gap also helps explain why the economic and healthcare burden of constipation seems disproportionately high for a condition that people tend to view as minor. When one in three people who have constipation does not realize it, the condition goes unmanaged for years, accumulating complications and eventually driving more expensive downstream care.

Geographic and Regional Differences

Constipation is not distributed evenly around the world. Occasional constipation rates ranged from about 4% in Middle Eastern countries to nearly 16% in Eastern Europe, with Latin America and Asia falling in between.⁴ Among children in Asia, a systematic review found that East Asian countries had roughly double the constipation prevalence of South Asian countries, at about 14% versus 7%.¹⁴

Dietary patterns, physical activity norms, toilet infrastructure, and healthcare-seeking behavior all likely contribute to these differences. Teasing apart which factors matter most is difficult because so many of them correlate with each other and with broader socioeconomic development. One finding that chips away at the commonly cited fiber explanation: in a study using NHANES data from the United States, low fluid intake was a consistent predictor of constipation in both men and women, but dietary fiber intake was not a significant independent predictor after adjusting for other factors.¹⁵ A pregnancy-focused study found something similar: fiber alone did not protect against constipation, but the combination of low fiber and low fluid intake did increase risk.¹⁶ The popular advice to “just eat more fiber” is therefore an oversimplification: fluid intake appears to be at least as important, and for many people more so.

Medication-Induced Constipation

A large share of constipation cases are caused or worsened by medications. Opioid painkillers are the best-known culprits. A Japanese cohort study of non-cancer patients starting weak opioids for chronic pain found that about 30% developed opioid-induced constipation within the first week, and roughly half had developed it by two weeks.¹⁷ A European multicenter study found a baseline prevalence of about 26% at the start of opioid therapy, with an additional 25% developing constipation over six months of treatment.¹⁸ Opioids slow gut contractions directly by binding to receptors in the intestinal wall, which is why this side effect does not go away with time the way drowsiness or nausea often do.

Opioids get the most attention, but many other drug classes contribute: antidepressants, antihistamines, blood pressure medications, iron supplements, and antacids containing calcium or aluminum. For people on multiple medications, the cumulative anticholinergic burden can be substantial, and constipation is often the first sign.

The Healthcare and Economic Burden

Constipation drives a remarkable amount of healthcare utilization for a condition most people think of as trivial. In the United States, emergency department visits for constipation grew by about 114% between 2006 and 2017.¹⁹ An earlier analysis covering 2006 to 2011 found the number of constipation-related ER visits rising from about 497,000 to over 703,000 per year, with the average cost per visit climbing from roughly $1,500 to $2,300 during that same period.²⁰

The broader economic picture is also substantial. A retrospective claims analysis estimated that people with chronic constipation incurred roughly $3,500 more per year in healthcare costs than matched controls without the condition, with the gap widening to about $4,400 for those who also had abdominal symptoms.²¹ A separate review found that patients with chronic constipation and abdominal symptoms reported losing more than three days of productive time per month, compared to about one day for those without symptoms.²² That work productivity loss adds up, especially in a condition this common.

Quality of Life Is Measurably Lower

Chronic constipation takes a surprisingly large toll on well-being. Studies consistently find that people with chronic constipation score worse on standard quality-of-life measures, covering physical health, mental health, social functioning, and vitality. A U.S. analysis found that people with chronic constipation reported significantly lower physical and mental health scores compared to matched controls, and also showed higher rates of absenteeism and reduced productivity at work.²³ A multinational survey found that the quality-of-life impact was especially pronounced in Brazil, where constipated individuals scored dramatically lower on social functioning and general health perception compared to their non-constipated peers.²⁴

In older women, persistent constipation was associated with higher self-reported depression even after accounting for the number of chronic illnesses and fluid intake.²⁵ This raises an important question about the direction of causation, which leads to the broader relationship between constipation and mental health.

The Mental Health Connection

People with chronic constipation are substantially more likely to experience anxiety and depression than the general population. One study found that anxiety and depression affected about 35% and 24% of patients with chronic constipation, respectively, compared to 8% and 4% in the general population.²⁶ A cross-sectional study using NHANES data found that anxiety was present in about 41% of people with constipation versus 26% of those without, and that constipation remained independently associated with anxiety after adjusting for demographics, lifestyle, and other medical conditions.²⁷ A study of Chinese university students found that about 22% met criteria for functional constipation, and those with depressive symptoms were roughly 1.8 times more likely to have constipation.²⁸

Whether anxiety and depression cause constipation, constipation causes distress, or both share underlying mechanisms involving the gut-brain axis is still being worked out. The emerging picture is that it goes in both directions, which means that treating one without addressing the other often leaves the patient stuck in a cycle.

Constipation in Parkinson’s Disease

One of the most interesting epidemiological patterns is the connection between constipation and Parkinson’s disease. Prevalence of constipation in Parkinson’s patients ranges from about 25% to 63%, depending on how constipation is defined.²⁹ One study of 306 Parkinson’s patients found that 61% had constipation, and among those, about a quarter had experienced constipation before any motor symptoms appeared.³⁰ This is not just a complication of the disease or its medications. The neurodegeneration that causes Parkinson’s appears to affect the gut’s nervous system early, sometimes years before tremor or stiffness develop. Researchers are actively investigating whether chronic constipation could serve as an early warning sign, though it is far too common in the general population to be useful as a screening tool on its own.

How People Actually Manage It

Despite how widespread constipation is, most people manage it without seeing a doctor. A large multinational survey found that over 90% of people with self-reported constipation took some kind of action, but only about 16% used laxatives.³¹ The rest relied on dietary changes, increased physical activity, or simply waited it out. Laxative use varies considerably by country and culture: in one earlier multinational survey, laxative use among constipated adults ranged from 16% in South Korea to 40% in the United States, and use tended to increase with age and symptom frequency.³²

Among those who do use laxatives, the most popular types are stimulant laxatives and bulk-forming agents like psyllium. A national cross-sectional study found that about 37% of people with constipation used over-the-counter laxatives, with half using them both for treatment and prevention, suggesting chronic rather than occasional use.³³ The widespread availability of these products means many people never enter the healthcare system for constipation, which helps explain why clinic-based prevalence estimates tend to run lower than community-based surveys.

Shift Work and Occupational Patterns

Whether your job schedule affects your bowel regularity is a reasonable question, and the evidence is mixed. A study using NHANES data found that constipation prevalence was about 7% in both shift workers and non-shift workers, suggesting no meaningful difference at the population level.³⁴ However, a more targeted study of auto factory workers found that rotating shift workers had higher constipation rates than morning-only workers, at about 10% versus 6%, and that office workers within the factory had the highest prevalence of any section at 26%.³⁵ The sedentary nature of desk work, combined with the disrupted circadian rhythm of shift schedules, may matter more in specific workplaces than broad national surveys are able to capture.