ArticleBJS open2018
Patient and healthcare professional perceptions of colostomy-related problems and their impact on quality of life following rectal cancer surgery.
Article in BJS open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diversion, resection, or stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute neoplastic left-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies with curative intent.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2021Pooled it
- Pleasurable and problematic receptive anal intercourse and diseases of the colon, rectum and anus.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2024Review
- Article
- Analysis of Healthcare Professionals' and Institutions' Roles in Twitter Colostomy Information.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Life with a stoma across five European countries-a cross-sectional study on long-term rectal cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Quality of Life after Rectal Cancer Resection Comparing Anterior Resection, Abdominoperineal Resection, and Complicated Cases.Visceral medicine · 2022Article
- Cross-Cultural Validation of Health and Quality of Life Measures for Children in Hong Kong.Occupational therapy international · 2022Article
- When do defecation function and quality of life recover for patients with non-ostomy and ostomy surgery of rectal cancer?BMC surgery · 2020Article
- Bowel Function After J-Pouch May Be More Complex Than Previously Appreciated: A Comprehensive Analysis to Highlight Existing Knowledge Gaps.Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2020Article
- Comparison of overall survival and quality of life between patients undergoing anal reconstruction and patients undergoing traditional lower abdominal stoma after radical resection.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe perception of colostomy-related problems and their impact on health-related quality of life (QoL) may differ between patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to investigate this using the Colostomy Impact Score (CIS) tool.
methodsHealthcare professionals including consultant colorectal surgeons, stoma nurses, ward nurses, trainees and medical students were recruited. An online survey was designed. From the 17 items used to develop the CIS, participants chose the seven factors they thought to confer the strongest negative impact on the QoL of patients with a colostomy. They were then asked to rank the 12 responses made by patients to the final seven factors contained in the CIS. Results were compared with the original patient rankings at the time of development of the CIS.
resultsA total of 156 healthcare professionals (50·4 per cent of the pooled professionals) from 17 countries completed the survey. Of the original seven items in the CIS, six were above the threshold for random selection. Ranking the responses, a poor match between participants and the original score was detected for 49·7 per cent of the professionals. The most under-rated item originally present in the CIS was stool consistency, reported by 47 of the 156 professionals (30·1 per cent), whereas frequency of changing the stoma bag was the item not included in the CIS that was chosen most often by professionals (124, 79·5 per cent). Significant differences were not observed between different groups of professionals.
conclusionThe perspective of colostomy-related problems differs between patients with a colostomy and healthcare professionals.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.