Search

Aims and objectives: To compare the differences in psychosocial behaviour reactions, psychosocial needs, anxiety and depression before and after colostomy surgery and to explore the predictors of psychosocial behaviour reactions. Background: Colorectal cancer is increasing worldwide. Abdominoperineal resection accompanied by permanent colostomy can cause complicated psychosocial reactions and needs. However, colostomy patients' trajectories of psychosocial adjustment at different time points must be discussed. Design: A longitudinal study. Methods: Using a convenience sampling method, 67 patients planning to undergo colostomy surgery were recruited from a tertiary cancer centre in southern China from January 2013–January 2014. Data collection consisted of two phases, conducted 1–2 days before surgery and 1–2 days prior to discharge. The Ostomy Psychosocial Behaviour Reaction Questionnaire, the Ostomy Psychosocial Needs Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and a self‐designed demographic questionnaire were used to collect data. STROBE guidelines were followed. Results: The participants had a moderate level of psychosocial behaviour reactions, a deep and wide range of psychosocial needs and a high incidence of anxiety and depression before and after surgery. Anxiety before surgery was significantly higher than that after surgery. Psychosocial needs and anxiety were significant predictors of psychosocial behaviour reactions. Conclusions: Patients' anxiety was alleviated after surgery. The combination of ascertaining and meeting various psychosocial needs and managing negative emotions was helpful in alleviating patients' stress responses before and after surgery. Relevance to clinical practice: An increased focus on the relationships among psychosocial behaviour reactions, psychosocial needs, anxiety and depression at different time points in colostomy patients is necessary for future research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: To reveal nurses’ self‐reported practice of managing chest tubes and to define decision‐makers for these practices. Background: No consensus exists regarding ideal chest‐tube management strategy, and there are wide variations of practice based on local policies and individual preferences, rather than standardised evidence‐based protocols. Design: This article describes a cross‐sectional study. Methods: Questionnaires were emailed to 31 hospitals in Tianjin, and the sample consisted of 296 clinical nurses whose work included nursing management of chest drains. The questionnaire, which was prepared by the authors of this research, consisted of three sections, including a total of 22 questions that asked for demographic information, answers regarding nursing management that reflected the practice they actually performed and who the decision‐makers were regarding eight chest‐drain management procedures. McNemar's test was used to analyse the data. Results: The results indicated that most respondents thought that it was necessary to manipulate chest tubes to remove clots impeding unobstructed drainage (91.2%). Most respondents indicated that dressings would be changed when the dressing was dysfunctional. At the same time, more than half of respondents approved of changing dressings routinely, and the frequency of changing dressings varied. When drainage was employed for pleural effusion and for a pneumothorax, 64.6% and 94.5% of respondents, respectively, considered that underwater seal‐drainage bottles should be changed routinely, and the frequency of changing bottles both varied. The results indicated that nurses were the primary decision‐makers in the replacement of chest tubes, manipulation of chest tubes and monitoring of drainage fluid. Conclusions: There was considerable variation in respondents’ self‐reported clinical nursing practice regarding management of chest drains. The rationale on which respondents’ practices were based also varied greatly. This study indicated that nurses were the primary decision‐makers for three of eight procedures regarding management of chest drains, which reflects that clinical nurses’ decision‐making power regarding management of chest drains was weak. Relevance to clinical practice: This study describes the nurse‐reported practices of Chinese nurses from Tianjin, including changing and selecting dressing types, manipulating chest tubes, clamping drains and replacing drainage bottles, and the study defines who the decision‐makers were for these interventions. By focusing on nurses’ self‐report of behaviours in managing chest drains (actual nursing practice vs. nursing knowledge), this article also relates the literature to the research findings and denotes the gaps in knowledge for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]