Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience?

Patrick Colquhoun, Roberto Kaiser, Jonathan Efron, Eric G. Weiss, Juan J. Nogueras, Anthony M. Vernava, Steven D. Wexner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: A colostomy offers definitive treatment for individuals with fecal incontinence (FI). Patients and physicians remain apprehensive regarding this option because the quality of life (QOL) with a colostomy is presumably worse than living with FI. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare the QOL of colostomy patients to patients with FI. Methods: A cross-sectional postal survey of patients with FI or an end colostomy was undertaken. QOL measures used included the Short Form 36 General Quality of Life Assessment (SF-36) and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score (FIQOL). Results: The colostomy group included 39 patients and the FI group included 71 patients. The average FI score for FI group was 12 ± 4.9 (0 = complete continence, 20 = severe incontinence). In the colostomy group the average colostomy function score was 12.9 ± 3.8 (7 = good function, 35 = poor function). Analysis of the SF-36 revealed higher social function score in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Analysis of the FIQOL revealed higher scores in the coping, embarrassment, lifestyle scales, and depression scales in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Conclusion: A colostomy is a viable option for patients who suffer from FI and offers a definitive cure with improved QOL.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1925-1928
Number of pages4
JournalWorld Journal of Surgery
Volume30
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Fecal Incontinence
Colostomy
Quality of Life
Life Style
Cross-Sectional Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Colquhoun, P., Kaiser, R., Efron, J., Weiss, E. G., Nogueras, J. J., Vernava, A. M., & Wexner, S. D. (2006). Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience? World Journal of Surgery, 30(10), 1925-1928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-006-0531-5

Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience? / Colquhoun, Patrick; Kaiser, Roberto; Efron, Jonathan; Weiss, Eric G.; Nogueras, Juan J.; Vernava, Anthony M.; Wexner, Steven D.

In: World Journal of Surgery, Vol. 30, No. 10, 10.2006, p. 1925-1928.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Colquhoun, P, Kaiser, R, Efron, J, Weiss, EG, Nogueras, JJ, Vernava, AM & Wexner, SD 2006, 'Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience?', World Journal of Surgery, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1925-1928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-006-0531-5
Colquhoun, Patrick ; Kaiser, Roberto ; Efron, Jonathan ; Weiss, Eric G. ; Nogueras, Juan J. ; Vernava, Anthony M. ; Wexner, Steven D. / Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience?. In: World Journal of Surgery. 2006 ; Vol. 30, No. 10. pp. 1925-1928.
@article{7a762361679a426f84de1a603698cd1b,
title = "Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience?",
abstract = "Background: A colostomy offers definitive treatment for individuals with fecal incontinence (FI). Patients and physicians remain apprehensive regarding this option because the quality of life (QOL) with a colostomy is presumably worse than living with FI. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare the QOL of colostomy patients to patients with FI. Methods: A cross-sectional postal survey of patients with FI or an end colostomy was undertaken. QOL measures used included the Short Form 36 General Quality of Life Assessment (SF-36) and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score (FIQOL). Results: The colostomy group included 39 patients and the FI group included 71 patients. The average FI score for FI group was 12 ± 4.9 (0 = complete continence, 20 = severe incontinence). In the colostomy group the average colostomy function score was 12.9 ± 3.8 (7 = good function, 35 = poor function). Analysis of the SF-36 revealed higher social function score in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Analysis of the FIQOL revealed higher scores in the coping, embarrassment, lifestyle scales, and depression scales in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Conclusion: A colostomy is a viable option for patients who suffer from FI and offers a definitive cure with improved QOL.",
author = "Patrick Colquhoun and Roberto Kaiser and Jonathan Efron and Weiss, {Eric G.} and Nogueras, {Juan J.} and Vernava, {Anthony M.} and Wexner, {Steven D.}",
year = "2006",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1007/s00268-006-0531-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "1925--1928",
journal = "World Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0364-2313",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the quality of life better in patients with colostomy than patients with fecal incontience?

AU - Colquhoun, Patrick

AU - Kaiser, Roberto

AU - Efron, Jonathan

AU - Weiss, Eric G.

AU - Nogueras, Juan J.

AU - Vernava, Anthony M.

AU - Wexner, Steven D.

PY - 2006/10

Y1 - 2006/10

N2 - Background: A colostomy offers definitive treatment for individuals with fecal incontinence (FI). Patients and physicians remain apprehensive regarding this option because the quality of life (QOL) with a colostomy is presumably worse than living with FI. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare the QOL of colostomy patients to patients with FI. Methods: A cross-sectional postal survey of patients with FI or an end colostomy was undertaken. QOL measures used included the Short Form 36 General Quality of Life Assessment (SF-36) and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score (FIQOL). Results: The colostomy group included 39 patients and the FI group included 71 patients. The average FI score for FI group was 12 ± 4.9 (0 = complete continence, 20 = severe incontinence). In the colostomy group the average colostomy function score was 12.9 ± 3.8 (7 = good function, 35 = poor function). Analysis of the SF-36 revealed higher social function score in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Analysis of the FIQOL revealed higher scores in the coping, embarrassment, lifestyle scales, and depression scales in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Conclusion: A colostomy is a viable option for patients who suffer from FI and offers a definitive cure with improved QOL.

AB - Background: A colostomy offers definitive treatment for individuals with fecal incontinence (FI). Patients and physicians remain apprehensive regarding this option because the quality of life (QOL) with a colostomy is presumably worse than living with FI. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare the QOL of colostomy patients to patients with FI. Methods: A cross-sectional postal survey of patients with FI or an end colostomy was undertaken. QOL measures used included the Short Form 36 General Quality of Life Assessment (SF-36) and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score (FIQOL). Results: The colostomy group included 39 patients and the FI group included 71 patients. The average FI score for FI group was 12 ± 4.9 (0 = complete continence, 20 = severe incontinence). In the colostomy group the average colostomy function score was 12.9 ± 3.8 (7 = good function, 35 = poor function). Analysis of the SF-36 revealed higher social function score in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Analysis of the FIQOL revealed higher scores in the coping, embarrassment, lifestyle scales, and depression scales in the colostomy group compared to the FI group. Conclusion: A colostomy is a viable option for patients who suffer from FI and offers a definitive cure with improved QOL.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33749011139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33749011139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00268-006-0531-5

DO - 10.1007/s00268-006-0531-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 16957817

AN - SCOPUS:33749011139

VL - 30

SP - 1925

EP - 1928

JO - World Journal of Surgery

JF - World Journal of Surgery

SN - 0364-2313

IS - 10

ER -