| Literature DB >> 27506432 |
Elisabeth González1, Kajsa Holm2, Berith Wennström3, Eva Haglind2, Eva Angenete2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients with low rectal cancer are often operated with an abdominoperineal excision (APE) rendering them a permanent stoma. The surgical procedure itself, the cancer diagnosis, and the permanent stoma might all affect quality of life. The aim of this study was to explore wellbeing and body image 3 years after APE in a population-based cohort of patients.Entities:
Keywords: Body image; Ostomy; Quality of life; Rectal neoplasm
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27506432 PMCID: PMC5031731 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-016-2628-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis ISSN: 0179-1958 Impact factor: 2.571
Fig. 1Study population questionnaire flow chart
Demography
| Patients | Answered the open-ended questions ( | Did not answer the open-ended questions ( | Total ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||
| Female | 137 (43 %) | 81 (36 %) | 218 (40 %) |
| Male | 183 (57 %) | 144 (64 %) | 327 (60 %) |
| Marital status * | |||
| Married or living together in a relationship | 231 (74 %) | 168 (77 %) | 399 (73 %) |
| Living alone, no relationship | 81 (26 %) | 49 (23 %) | 130 (24 %) |
| Age median (range Q1:Q3) | 65 (59:71) | 68 (61:73) | 66 (60:73) |
| BMI median (range Q1:Q3) | 25 (22.8:28.1) | 25.7 (23.5:28.3) | 25.3 (23:28.1) |
| ASA classification ** | |||
| ASA I | 77 (25 %) | 67 (30 %) | 144 (27 %) |
| ASA II | 191 (62 %) | 123 (55 %) | 314 (59 %) |
| ASA III | 42 (13 %) | 31 (14 %) | 73 (14 %) |
| ASA IV | 0 (0 %) | 2 (1 %) | 2 (0 %) |
| Depression (% No)*** | 279 (89 %) | 183 (85 %) | 462 (88 %) |
| Tumor stage **** | |||
| Stage 0 | 17 (5 %) | 5 (2 %) | 22 (4 %) |
| Stage I | 33 (11 %) | 15 (7 %) | 48 (9 %) |
| Stage II | 101 (32 %) | 85 (38 %) | 186 (35 %) |
| Stage III | 141 (45 %) | 111 (50 %) | 252 (47 %) |
| Stage IV | 20 (6 %) | 7 (3 %) | 27 (5 %) |
| Pre-operative chemo radiotherapy | |||
| 5Gy ×5 | 201 (63 %) | 154 (68 %) | 355 (65 %) |
| 1.8Gy × 25 | 81 (25 %) | 41 (18 %) | 122 (22 %) |
| Other | 38 (12 %) | 30 (13 %) | 68 (13 %) |
| Local recurrence (%) | 3(1 %) | 3(1 %) | 6(1 %) |
| Type of perineal dissection | |||
| APE | 42 (13 %) | 29 (13 %) | 71 (13 %) |
| ELAPE | 128 (40 %) | 94 (42 %) | 222 (41 %) |
| Not stated | 150 (47 %) | 102 (45 %) | 252 (46 %) |
*missing (n = 16), **missing (n = 12), ***missing (n = 17), **** missing (n = 10)
Main themes and sub-themes
| Main themes | Sub-themes |
|---|---|
| Theme A “bodily limitations” | 1. Stoma-related problems |
| Theme B “mental suffering” | 1. Ashamed of the body |
| Theme C “acceptance” | 1. Unchanged everyday life |
The qualitative analysis revealed three themes and in total nine sub-themes as described below
Number of patients in each theme and theme combination
| Theme and theme combinations* | Number of patients ( |
|---|---|
| A-bodily limitations | 15 (5 %) |
| B - mental suffering | 17 (5 %) |
| C - acceptance | 116 (36 %) |
| AB - bodily limitations and mental suffering | 25 (8 %) |
| ABC - acceptance although bodily limitations and mental suffering | 50 (16 %) |
| AC - acceptance although bodily limitations | 45 (14 %) |
| BC - acceptance although mental suffering | 52 (16 %) |
*Each patient belongs to only one theme or combination of themes
Fig. 2Venn diagram shows the distribution of themes schematically