Sandra Jumbe1, Jane Meyrick2. 1. Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, Yvonne Carter Building, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK. s.jumbe@qmul.ac.uk. 2. Department of Psychology, University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus, Bristol, BS16 1QY, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The superiority of obesity surgery for improving medical and weight outcomes in severely obese patients when compared to other weight loss interventions remains undisputed. However, knowledge about the psychological impact of the procedure on patients' lives is limited. Systematic reviews indicate persisting psychological distress after surgery compared to control groups especially longer term, suggesting the need for postoperative psychological support and assessment. Research literature also infers limited knowledge regarding the postoperative patient experience of obesity surgery. This may form a barrier in health practitioners' understanding of these patients' ongoing needs. METHODS: Ten patients who had obesity surgery two or more years ago and eight obesity surgery practitioners were recruited within hospital settings and individually interviewed by the researcher to capture their accounts of the postoperative experience. Concordance between the two groups was explored to gauge awareness of patients' subsequent health needs. RESULTS: Thematic analysis of transcribed interviews elicited a key finding around 'post-surgical cliffs in patient care' within a heavily structured service. Participants reported some unmet needs, namely, psychological aftercare to facilitate adjustment following drastic weight loss and excess skin, acceptance of their non-obese self and perceived stigma. The impact of contrasting views of success between patients and practitioners on postoperative care within the service context was highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity surgery is a great weight loss catalyst for severe obesity. However, lack of psychological aftercare may threaten early gains in health outcomes over the longer term. More qualitative and quantitative studies are needed to validate current study results.
BACKGROUND: The superiority of obesity surgery for improving medical and weight outcomes in severely obesepatients when compared to other weight loss interventions remains undisputed. However, knowledge about the psychological impact of the procedure on patients' lives is limited. Systematic reviews indicate persisting psychological distress after surgery compared to control groups especially longer term, suggesting the need for postoperative psychological support and assessment. Research literature also infers limited knowledge regarding the postoperative patient experience of obesity surgery. This may form a barrier in health practitioners' understanding of these patients' ongoing needs. METHODS: Ten patients who had obesity surgery two or more years ago and eight obesity surgery practitioners were recruited within hospital settings and individually interviewed by the researcher to capture their accounts of the postoperative experience. Concordance between the two groups was explored to gauge awareness of patients' subsequent health needs. RESULTS: Thematic analysis of transcribed interviews elicited a key finding around 'post-surgical cliffs in patient care' within a heavily structured service. Participants reported some unmet needs, namely, psychological aftercare to facilitate adjustment following drastic weight loss and excess skin, acceptance of their non-obese self and perceived stigma. The impact of contrasting views of success between patients and practitioners on postoperative care within the service context was highlighted. CONCLUSIONS:Obesity surgery is a great weight loss catalyst for severe obesity. However, lack of psychological aftercare may threaten early gains in health outcomes over the longer term. More qualitative and quantitative studies are needed to validate current study results.
Entities:
Keywords:
Longer term outcomes; Psychological health; Qualitative
Authors: Richard Welbourn; John Dixon; Julian H Barth; Nicholas Finer; Carly A Hughes; Carel W le Roux; John Wass Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Sarah J Hardcastle; Adrian H Taylor; Martin P Bailey; Robert A Harley; Martin S Hagger Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Jennifer Daubenmier; Patricia J Moran; Jean Kristeller; Michael Acree; Peter Bacchetti; Margaret E Kemeny; Mary Dallman; Robert H Lustig; Carl Grunfeld; Douglas F Nixon; Jeffrey M Milush; Veronica Goldman; Barbara Laraia; Kevin D Laugero; Leslie Woodhouse; Elissa S Epel; Frederick M Hecht Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Pål André Hegland; Anny Aasprang; Ronette L Kolotkin; Grethe S Tell; John Roger Andersen Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Pål André Hegland; Anny Aasprang; Ronette L Kolotkin; Christian Moltu; Grethe S Tell; John Roger Andersen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Susanna Every-Palmer; Sarah E Romans; Richard Stubbs; Anneka Tomlinson; Sophie Gandhi; Mark Huthwaite Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 4.157