ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Implementing a Self-Efficacy-Based Nursing Bundle to Enhance Social Support in Patients with Enterostomies: A Single-Centre Quality Improvement Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with enterostomies face major challenges related to inadequate social support and lack of continuity in traditional nursing care. Current care models often fail to address the psychological and social needs of these patients, leading to poor outcomes and reduced quality of life. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a self-efficacy-based nursing bundle in improving social support and self-care ability, reducing stoma-related complications and alleviating pain/discomfort among patients with enterostomies. Design/Methods: This was a single-centre, quasi-experimental before-after quality improvement (QI) study comparing the baseline period (Q1-Q2 2023, n = 45) with the intervention period (Q3-Q4 2023, n = 45). The intervention was developed and implemented using the Focus-Organise-Clarify-Understand-Select Plan-Do-Study-Act (FOCUS-PDSA) QI methodology. The primary outcome measure of study was social support, and the secondary outcome measures were self-care ability, reduction of stoma-related complications, and reduction of pain/discomfort. And the primary outcome was the change in Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS) score from baseline to 3 months. Multivariate linear regression adjusted for confounders with Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons (pre-specified in the analysis plan). This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Hospital of AUST (no: 2023-KY-B114-001). Results: After adjustment, the total SSRS score increased by 10.7 points (95% CI: 8.4-12.9, Cohen's d = 1.24). Significant improvements were observed in subjective support (β = 4.2, 95% CI: 3.1-5.3), objective support (β = 3.8, 95% CI: 2.9-4.7) and support utilisation (β = 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8-3.6). Secondary outcomes also favoured the intervention, including improved self-care ability (Exercise of Self-Care Agency score increase, adjusted difference = 10.4, 95% CI: 7.2-13.6), reduced peristomal pain (visual analogue scale adjusted difference = -1.6, 95% CI: -2.3 to -0.9) and fewer stoma-related complications (28.9% vs 11.1%, RR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.15-0.98). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: This QI project demonstrates a replicable, low-cost intervention that considerably improves social support and clinical outcomes for patients with enterostomies. The FOCUS-PDSA framework supported successful implementation, and the intervention warrants dissemination to primary care settings.
Indexed as
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.