Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Descriptive, cross-sectional study evaluates social support and psychosocial adjustment in colostomy patients, revealing no significant correlation.
The purpose of this study was to determine levels of social support received by individuals with a colostomy and evaluate the relationship between social support and ostomy adjustment. Descriptive, cross-sectional. The sample comprised 52 participants who underwent colostomy surgery for colorectal cancer treatment. Their mean age was 52.34 years (SD = 9.61) more than half were women (n = 28, 53.4%). The study setting was the stomatherapy units of 2 hospitals in Istanbul, Turkey. Data were collected between January 01 and April 05, 2019. A questionnaire that included a participant information form, and 2 validated instruments: the Cancer-Specific Social Support Scale (CSSS), and the Ostomy Adjustment Inventory (OAI-23). Outcomes were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Spearman correlation test. The mean CSSS score was 127.92 (SD = 10.62); subscale scores were 59.48 (SD = 8.44) for confidence support, 41.23 (SD = 2.93) for emotional support, and 27.21 (SD = 7.23) for information support; these scores indicate high levels of social support. The mean total score for the OAI-23 was 45.48 (SD = 18.97), indicating moderate levels of psychosocial adjustment to an ostomy. Analysis revealed no significant relationship between the CSSS and psychosocial adjustment scores (P = .720). A significant negative correlation was found between the perceived information support scores and accepting and anxiety subscale scores. No relationship was found between perceived social support and psychosocial adjustment. A significant negative correlation was found between the perceived information support scores and anxiety subscale scores.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karadede et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: