评估大便失禁重症患者粪便管理系统的有效性和安全性:回顾性队列研究

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1155/2024/7644383
Xiecheng Zhou, Ying Yue, Lifeng Gong, Huipeng Wang, Zhou Xin, Yuhui Cui, Wenjie Chen, Xin Wang, Jian Shi, Yuankun Cai
{"title":"评估大便失禁重症患者粪便管理系统的有效性和安全性:回顾性队列研究","authors":"Xiecheng Zhou,&nbsp;Ying Yue,&nbsp;Lifeng Gong,&nbsp;Huipeng Wang,&nbsp;Zhou Xin,&nbsp;Yuhui Cui,&nbsp;Wenjie Chen,&nbsp;Xin Wang,&nbsp;Jian Shi,&nbsp;Yuankun Cai","doi":"10.1155/2024/7644383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Background</i>. Few large-sample studies have examined the use of fecal management systems (FMSs) in intensive care units (ICUs) or evaluated the associated complications. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of FMS for stool diversion in ICU patients with fecal incontinence (FI). <i>Methods</i>. We enrolled 381 FI patients, assigning them to either an FMS group (<i>n</i> = 134), which used a fecal management device, or a usual care (UC) group (<i>n</i> = 247) that received standard care including regular perianal cleaning. <i>Results</i>. The FMS group reported lower incidence and severity of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) and higher Braden Scale scores (10.42 ± 2.77) compared to the UC group (9.71 ± 2.56), indicating reduced pressure ulcer risk. Notably, FMS-associated complications were minimal, with only 5 patients (3.73%) affected; one required surgical intervention for rectal mucosal bleeding. <i>Conclusions</i>. FMS significantly reduced stool-associated skin irritation, lowered the incidence of IAD and pressure injuries, and improved nurses’ convenience compared to UC.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15381,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/7644383","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of Fecal Management Systems among Severely Ill Patients Suffering from Fecal Incontinence: A Retrospective Cohort Study\",\"authors\":\"Xiecheng Zhou,&nbsp;Ying Yue,&nbsp;Lifeng Gong,&nbsp;Huipeng Wang,&nbsp;Zhou Xin,&nbsp;Yuhui Cui,&nbsp;Wenjie Chen,&nbsp;Xin Wang,&nbsp;Jian Shi,&nbsp;Yuankun Cai\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/7644383\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p><i>Background</i>. Few large-sample studies have examined the use of fecal management systems (FMSs) in intensive care units (ICUs) or evaluated the associated complications. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of FMS for stool diversion in ICU patients with fecal incontinence (FI). <i>Methods</i>. We enrolled 381 FI patients, assigning them to either an FMS group (<i>n</i> = 134), which used a fecal management device, or a usual care (UC) group (<i>n</i> = 247) that received standard care including regular perianal cleaning. <i>Results</i>. The FMS group reported lower incidence and severity of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) and higher Braden Scale scores (10.42 ± 2.77) compared to the UC group (9.71 ± 2.56), indicating reduced pressure ulcer risk. Notably, FMS-associated complications were minimal, with only 5 patients (3.73%) affected; one required surgical intervention for rectal mucosal bleeding. <i>Conclusions</i>. FMS significantly reduced stool-associated skin irritation, lowered the incidence of IAD and pressure injuries, and improved nurses’ convenience compared to UC.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15381,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"2024 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/7644383\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/7644383\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/7644383","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景。很少有大样本研究对重症监护病房(ICU)中粪便管理系统(FMS)的使用情况或相关并发症进行评估。本研究旨在评估粪便管理系统在重症监护病房粪便失禁(FI)患者粪便转运中的有效性和安全性。方法。我们招募了 381 名大便失禁患者,将他们分配到使用粪便管理装置的 FMS 组(n = 134)或接受标准护理(包括定期清洗肛周)的常规护理(UC)组(n = 247)。结果显示与UC组(9.71 ± 2.56)相比,FMS组尿失禁相关皮炎(IAD)的发生率和严重程度较低,布莱登量表评分(10.42 ± 2.77)较高,表明压疮风险降低。值得注意的是,FMS 相关并发症极少,仅有 5 名患者(3.73%)受到影响;其中一名患者因直肠粘膜出血而需要手术治疗。结论与 UC 相比,FMS 大大减少了粪便对皮肤的刺激,降低了 IAD 和压伤的发生率,为护士提供了更多便利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of Fecal Management Systems among Severely Ill Patients Suffering from Fecal Incontinence: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. Few large-sample studies have examined the use of fecal management systems (FMSs) in intensive care units (ICUs) or evaluated the associated complications. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of FMS for stool diversion in ICU patients with fecal incontinence (FI). Methods. We enrolled 381 FI patients, assigning them to either an FMS group (n = 134), which used a fecal management device, or a usual care (UC) group (n = 247) that received standard care including regular perianal cleaning. Results. The FMS group reported lower incidence and severity of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) and higher Braden Scale scores (10.42 ± 2.77) compared to the UC group (9.71 ± 2.56), indicating reduced pressure ulcer risk. Notably, FMS-associated complications were minimal, with only 5 patients (3.73%) affected; one required surgical intervention for rectal mucosal bleeding. Conclusions. FMS significantly reduced stool-associated skin irritation, lowered the incidence of IAD and pressure injuries, and improved nurses’ convenience compared to UC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics provides a forum for clinicians, pharmacists and pharmacologists to explore and report on issues of common interest. Reports and commentaries on current issues in medical and pharmaceutical practice are encouraged. Papers on evidence-based clinical practice and multidisciplinary collaborative work are particularly welcome. Regular sections in the journal include: editorials, commentaries, reviews (including systematic overviews and meta-analyses), original research and reports, and book reviews. Its scope embraces all aspects of clinical drug development and therapeutics, including: Rational therapeutics Evidence-based practice Safety, cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy of drugs Drug interactions Clinical impact of drug formulations Pharmacogenetics Personalised, stratified and translational medicine Clinical pharmacokinetics.
期刊最新文献
Medication Errors: An Update From the Central Region of Ghana Synergistic Inhibitory Effect of Gliquidone Against Cisplatin-Resistant Human Lung Adenocarcinoma TH-302: A Highly Selective Hypoxia-Activated Prodrug for Treating PARP Inhibitor–Resistant Cancers Potential Role of APC Mutations in the Prognosis and Targeted Therapy of Gastric Adenocarcinoma The Evaluation for Expandable Applications of Tislelizumab in First-Line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1