The Effects of Continuous Care Model of Information-Based Hospital-Family Integration on Colostomy Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial

  • Limin XiaEmail author


The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of continuous care model of information-based hospital-family integration on colostomy patients. Miles’ operation is a major operative method for treating low rectal cancer, and this operation results in a permanent colostomy. It is difficult for patients to adapt to their colostomy. Previous studies have applied generally conventional nursing models to colostomy patients. This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial study. The sample of 155 patients who met the inclusion criteria was randomly assigned to either the experimental (n = 81) or control group (n = 74). The control group was provided with a routine standard of care. The experimental group was provided with an experimental treatment that consisted of an information-based (WeChat, blog, QQ, telephone, etc.) hospital-family integration continuous care model. Study variables were collected and instruments were selected as follows: basic information, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), a self-efficacy scale, a colostomy complication assessment table, a quality of life scale, and a table of the degree of satisfaction. No statistically significant differences were found in demographic information between the experimental and control groups. In comparison with the control group, subjects in the experimental group had less anxiety and could better cope with anxiety, had a better self-efficacy and quality of life scores, and had fewer complications. The patients in the experimental group were shown to be more satisfied with the care model. In addition, the most useful and popular service is the online social tools WeChat and QQ, because they can communicate with video, and they are more real-time, efficient, and cheap. The continuous care model of information-based hospital-family integration significantly strengthened patients’ self-efficacy and confidence, which decreased colostomy complications, ultimately improving the quality of life.


Colostomy Information-based Continuous care model Quality of life 



This work was supported by 2016 Wenzhou Public Welfare Science and Technology Project [Grant Number Y20160578].

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The study was approved by the ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Matsubara T, Kasagi Y, Ogaki K et al (2017) Recurrence with pagetoid spread arising 17 years after surgery for intramucosal rectal cancer: a case report. Surgical Case Rep 3:85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang JH, Xu JH, Ye F, Xu XM, Lin JJ, Chen WB (2015) Malone antegrade continence enema in patients with perineal colostomy after rectal resection. Indian J Surg 77:650–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Näsvall P, Dahlstrand U, Löwenmark T, Rutegård J, Gunnarsson U, Strigård K (2017) Quality of life in patients with a permanent stoma after rectal cancer surgery. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehab 26:55–64Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Krouse RS, Grant M, McCorkle R et al (2016) A chronic care ostomy self-management program for cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology 25:574–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gu J, Chen N (2013) Current status of rectal cancer treatment in China. Colorectal Disease : the Official Journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland 15(394):1345–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kong L, Chen X, Shen S et al (2016) Professional commitment and attributional style of medical-college nursing students in China: a cross-sectional study. Nurse Educ Today 40:154–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu AW, Gu J, Wang J et al (2007) Results after change of treatment policy for rectal cancer--report from a single hospital in China. European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology 33:718–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zheng H, Guo T, Wu Y et al (2017) Rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection in Chinese patients with colorectal cancer. Oncotarget 8:73123–73132PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Couwenberg AM, de Beer FSA, Intven MPW, et al (2017) The impact of postoperative complications on health-related quality of life in older patients with rectal cancer; a prospective cohort study. Journal of Geriatric OncologyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huser N, Michalski CW, Erkan M et al (2008) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 248:52–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mahalingam S, Seshadri RA, Veeraiah S (2017) Long-term functional and oncological outcomes following intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancers. Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology 8:457–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Quinn CC, Port CL, Zimmerman S et al (2008) Short-stay nursing home rehabilitation patients: transitional care problems pose research challenges. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:1940–1945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaminetzky CP, Beste LA, Poppe AP et al (2017) Implementation of a novel population panel management curriculum among interprofessional health care trainees. BMC Med Educ 17:264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Saarnio L, Bostrom AM, Hedman R, Gustavsson P, Ohlen J (2017) Enabling at-homeness for residents living in a nursing home: reflected experience of nursing home staff. J Aging Stud 43:40–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alitta Q, Grino M, Adjemout L, Langar A, Retornaz F, Oliver C (2017) Overestimation of hypoglycemia diagnosis by freestyle libre continuous glucose monitoring in long-term care home residents with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol 1932296817747887Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paganelli F, Giuli D (2011) An ontology-based system for context-aware and configurable services to support home-based continuous care. IEEE transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine : a Publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society 15:324–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yin J, Li Q, Sun Q (2017) Antibiotic consumption in Shandong Province, China: an analysis of provincial pharmaceutical centralized bidding procurement data at public healthcare institutions, 2012-16. J Antimicrob ChemotherGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Amiri MJ, Sadeghi T, Negahban Bonabi T (2017) The effect of natural sounds on the anxiety of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Perioperative Medicine (London, England) 6:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kvaal K, Ulstein I, Nordhus IH, Engedal K (2005) The Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI): the state scale in detecting mental disorders in geriatric patients. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 20:629–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shek DT (1988) Reliability and factorial structure of the Chinese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 10:303–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Msn WFMR, MD Y-CLIU, Msn YFCR, MD H-YLANE, MD T-JLAI, Edd LCHR (2013) Evaluation of psychometric properties of the Chinese Mandarin version State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Y form in Taiwanese outpatients with anxiety disorders. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 20:499–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hishinuma ES, Miyamoto RH, Nishimura ST et al (2000) Psychometric properties of the state-trait anxiety inventory for Asian/Pacific-islander adolescents. Assessment 7:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Iwata N, Mishima N, Okabe K, Kobayashi N, Hashiguchi E, Egashira K (2000) Psychometric properties of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory among Japanese clinical outpatients. J Clin Psychol 56:793–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bandura A (2005) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. J Cogn Psychother 13Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Simmons KL, Smith JA, Bobb KA, Liles LL (2007) Adjustment to colostomy: stoma acceptance, stoma care self-efficacy and interpersonal relationships. J Adv Nurs 60:627–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Simmons KL, Smith JA, Bobb KA, Liles LLM (2010) Adjustment to colostomy: stoma acceptance, stoma care self-efficacy and interpersonal relationships. J Adv Nurs 60:627–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chiu FP, Tsang HW (2004) Validation of the Chinese general self-efficacy scale among individuals with schizophrenia in Hong Kong. Int J Rehabil Res 27:159–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vivienne Wu SF, Courtney M, Edwards H, Mcdowell J, Shortridgebaggett LM, Chang PJ (2008) Development and validation of the Chinese version of the Diabetes Management Self-efficacy Scale. Int J Nurs Stud 45:534–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hampton NZ (2006) A psychometric evaluation of the career decision self-efficacy scale-short form in Chinese high school students. J Career Dev 33:142–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ling LL, Perng SJ, Ho CC, Hsu HM, Shu CL, Arthur A (2009) A preliminary reliability and validity study of the Chinese version of the self-efficacy for exercise scale for older adults. Int J Nurs Stud 46:230–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bekkers MJ, van Knippenberg FC, van den Borne HW, van Berge-Henegouwen GP (1996) Prospective evaluation of psychosocial adaptation to stoma surgery: the role of self-efficacy. Psychosom Med 58:183–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Prieto L, Thorsen H, Juul K (2005) Development and validation of a quality of life questionnaire for patients with colostomy or ileostomy. Health Qual Life Outcomes 3:62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baxter NN, Novotny PJ, Jacobson T, Maidl LJ, Sloan J, Young-Fadok TM (2006) A stoma quality of life scale. Dis Colon Rectum 49:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Canova C, Giorato E, Roveron G, Turrini P, Zanotti R (2013) Validation of a stoma-specific quality of life questionnaire in a sample of patients with colostomy or ileostomy. Color Dis 15:E692–E698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Johansson P, Oleni M, Fridlund B (2002) Patient satisfaction with nursing care in the context of health care: a literature study. Scand J Caring Sci 16:337–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chan EA (2014) Cue-responding during simulated routine nursing care: a mixed method study. Nurse Educ Today 34:1057–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ferreira S, Amorim M, Couto A (2017) Exploring clinical metrics to assess the health impact of traffic injuries. Int J Inj Control Saf Promot 1–9Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Burch J (2017) Post-discharge care for patients following stoma formation: what the nurse needs to know. Nursing Standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987) 31:41–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cengiz B, Bahar Z (2017) Perceived barriers and home care needs when adapting to a fecal ostomy: a phenomenological study. Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing : Official Publication of the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society 44:63–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Trad W, Koh ES, Daher M et al (2015) Screening for psychological distress in adult primary brain tumor patients and caregivers: considerations for cancer care coordination. Front Oncol 5:203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liu X, He X, Li L, Huang L, Liu Z (2015) Influence of continuous nursing on the psychological state and coping style of patients undergoing pacemaker implantation. Iran J Public Health 44:953–961PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lim SH, Chan SW, Lai JH, He HG (2015) A randomized controlled trial examining the effectiveness of a STOMA psychosocial intervention programme on the outcomes of colorectal patients with a stoma: study protocol. J Adv Nurs 71:1310–1323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hidalgo Diaz JJ, Botero SS, Vernet P, Aguerre C, Facca S, Liverneaux P (2016) The role of self-efficiency toward pain following surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation 35:413–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Greenhawt M, DunnGalvin A (2018) Preliminary psychometric analyses and clinical performance of a caregiver self-efficacy scale for food allergy self-management. Annals of allergy, Asthma & Immunology : Official Publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology 120:73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yin TC, Tsai HL, Yang PF et al (2017) Early closure of defunctioning stoma increases complications related to stoma closure after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer. World J Surg Oncol 15(80)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zhang JE, Wong FK, You LM et al (2013) Effects of enterostomal nurse telephone follow-up on postoperative adjustment of discharged colostomy patients. Cancer Nurs 36:419–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL (1993) Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 118:622–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Joseph DA, Johnson CJ, White A, Wu M, Coleman MP (2017) Rectal cancer survival in the United States by race and stage, 2001 to 2009: findings from the CONCORD-2 study. Cancer 123(Suppl 24):5037–5058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Liu Z, Kang L, Huang M, et al (2017) Decrease of sphincter preserving length lowers the postoperative genital function for patients with rectal cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan TechGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association for Cancer Education 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Colorectal and Anal SurgeryThe First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical UniversityWenzhouChina

Personalised recommendations