Wang Mei, Dai Lihong, Fang Xia, Zheng Yan, Shen Yuanhao, Yu Yang
Department of General Surgery, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Department of Urology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Nurs Open. 2025 Mar;12(3):e70189. doi: 10.1002/nop2.70189.
Ileostomy and colostomy are two effective clinical methods for intestinal diversion, but both have disadvantages. It is necessary to adopt corresponding nursing interventions for stoma patients to improve their quality of life.
The study explored the recovery status and nursing differences of patients who underwent temporary ileostomy and temporary colostomy.
A retrospective cohort study.
Patients who underwent temporary ostomy were divided into the ileostomy group and colostomy group according to the surgical method. Relevant clinical data of patients were collected, and differences in postoperative nursing were explored through a chi-square test. Meanwhile, a Quality-of-Life (QOL) assessment was compiled to assess the impact of different ostomy types on patients' postoperative quality of life. The study was conducted according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. The research question of the study focuses on how to evaluate the patient's recovery status and provide a basis for targeted nursing care for post-ostomy patients.
The postoperative regular defecation rate of the ileostomy group was significantly lower than that of the colostomy group (p = 0.031), and the anastomotic healing rate of the ileostomy group was significantly higher than that of the colostomy group 1 week postoperatively (p = 0.037). According to the analysis of the QOL assessment, the ileostomy group showed significantly higher tolerance to ostomy faeces odour than the colostomy group (p = 0.002), and postoperative appetite in the ileostomy group was significantly better than that in the colostomy group (p = 0.002).
Compared with the colostomy group, the ileostomy group had a higher anastomotic healing rate 1 week postoperatively, a faster recovery of intestinal peristalsis, a better appetite after surgery, an easier tolerance to the odour of stoma faeces and a higher comprehensive postoperative quality of life.
Nurses and other healthcare professionals should be aware of the differences in surgical techniques for stoma patients. Nursing work should strengthen attention to postoperative diet and ostomy hygiene care for colostomy patients.
Fifty patients consented and were enrolled. The stoma surgeries were carried out by the surgical team, while the nursing team was responsible for postoperative care, data collection, analysis and interpretation.
回肠造口术和结肠造口术是肠道改道的两种有效临床方法，但两者都有缺点。有必要对造口患者采取相应的护理干预措施，以提高其生活质量。
本研究探讨接受临时回肠造口术和临时结肠造口术患者的恢复状况及护理差异。
一项回顾性队列研究。
将接受临时造口术的患者根据手术方式分为回肠造口组和结肠造口组。收集患者的相关临床资料，并通过卡方检验探讨术后护理的差异。同时，编制生活质量（QOL）评估量表，以评估不同造口类型对患者术后生活质量的影响。本研究按照《加强流行病学观察性研究报告规范》（STROBE）声明进行。该研究的研究问题集中在如何评估患者的恢复状况，并为造口术后患者的针对性护理提供依据。
回肠造口组术后规律排便率显著低于结肠造口组（p = 0.031），回肠造口组术后1周吻合口愈合率显著高于结肠造口组（p = 0.037）。根据生活质量评估分析，回肠造口组对造口粪便气味的耐受性显著高于结肠造口组（p = 0.00²），回肠造口组术后食欲显著优于结肠造口组（p = 0.00²）。
与结肠造口组相比，回肠造口组术后1周吻合口愈合率更高，肠道蠕动恢复更快，术后食欲更好，对造口粪便气味的耐受性更强，术后综合生活质量更高。
护士和其他医护人员应了解造口患者手术技术的差异。护理工作应加强对结肠造口患者术后饮食和造口卫生护理的关注。
50名患者同意并参与研究。造口手术由手术团队进行，而护理团队负责术后护理、数据收集、分析和解读。
