Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25469107›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2014

Bowel problem management among nursing home residents: a mixed methods study.

Susan Saga, Arnfinn Seim, Siv Mørkved, Christine Norton, Anne Guttormsen Vinsnes

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Susan SagaFaculty of Nursing, Sør-Trøndelag University College, Postbox 2320, 7004 Trondheim, Norway ; Department of Public Health and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Postbox 8905, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Arnfinn SeimDepartment of Public Health and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Postbox 8905, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Siv MørkvedDepartment of Public Health and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Postbox 8905, 7491 Trondheim, Norway ; Clinical Service, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, 7006 Trondheim, Norway.
Christine NortonFaculty of Nursing, Sør-Trøndelag University College, Postbox 2320, 7004 Trondheim, Norway ; Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, King's College London, 57 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8WA UK.
Anne Guttormsen VinsnesFaculty of Nursing, Sør-Trøndelag University College, Postbox 2320, 7004 Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NOFlorence Nightingale Foundation · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBowel problems such as constipation, diarrhoea and faecal incontinence (FI) are prevalent conditions among nursing home residents and little is known about nursing management. This study aimed to elucidate how Norwegian registered nurses (RNs) manage bowel problems among nursing home residents.

methodsA mixed methods approach was used combining quantitative data from a population-based cross-sectional survey and qualitative data from a focus group interview. In the cross sectional part of the study 27 of 28 nursing homes in one Norwegian municipality participated. Residents were included if they, at the time of data collection, had been a resident in a nursing home for more than three weeks or had prior stays of more than four weeks during the last six months. Residents were excluded from the study if they were younger than 65 years or had a stoma (N = 980 after exclusions). RNs filled in a questionnaire for residents regarding FI, constipation, diarrhoea, and treatments/interventions. In the focus group interview, 8 RNs participated. The focus group interview used an interview guide that included six open-ended questions.

resultsPad use (88.9%) and fixed toilet schedules (38.6%) were the most commonly used interventions for residents with FI. In addition, the qualitative data showed that controlled emptying of the bowels with laxatives and/or enemas was common. Common interventions for residents with constipation were laxatives (66.2%) and enemas (47%), dietary interventions (7.3%) and manual emptying of feces (6.3%). In addition, the qualitative data showed that the RNs also used fixed toilet schedules for residents with constipation. Interventions for residents with diarrhoea were Loperamide (18.3%) and dietary interventions (20.1%). RNs described bowel care management as challenging due to limited time and resources. Consequently, compromises were a part of their working strategies.

conclusionsConstipation was considered to be the main focus of bowel management. Emptying the residents' bowels was the aim of nursing intervention. FI was mainly treated passively with pads and interventions for residents with diarrhoea were limited. The RNs prioritized routine tasks in the nursing homes due to limited resources, and thereby compromising with the resident's need for individualized bowel care.

Indexed as

ConstipationCross-sectional surveyDiarrhoeaFaecal incontinenceFocus groupsNursing homes

Identifiers

PMID25469107
PMCPMC4251841
OpenAlexW2068266880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.