Effect of quantitative assessment‐based nursing intervention on the bowel function and life quality of patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury

Aims and objectives To study the effect of quantitative assessment‐based nursing intervention on the bowel function and life quality of patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury. Background Neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury was clinically manifested by a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical nursing 2018-03, Vol.27 (5-6), p.e1146-e1151
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Yanyan, Xia, Xiyan, Zhuang, Xuewei
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aims and objectives To study the effect of quantitative assessment‐based nursing intervention on the bowel function and life quality of patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury. Background Neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury was clinically manifested by abdominal distension, intractable constipation, prolonged defecation and faecal incontinence, which seriously affected the normal life of patients. Traditional ways of nursing for these patients focused on basic care, but lacked sufficient recognition of disease severity and individual needs. Design One hundred and eighty‐four patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury were randomly allocated into observation group (n = 92) and control group (n = 92). Methods The patients in the control group were given regular nursing, and the patients in the observation group were given quantitative assessment‐based nursing intervention. Recovery of bowel function, quality of life and satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results Scores for bowel function including bloating, constipation, prolonged defecation, defecation drug dependence and faecal incontinence in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p 
ISSN:0962-1067
1365-2702
DOI:10.1111/jocn.14198