![[ Visit WOCN Website ]](images/banner.jpg)
Methods: A cross sectional quantitative descriptive design with qualitative components was used. Following pilot testing of the researcher designed instrument, the survey was mailed to 1,000 random samples of wound ostomy continence nurses via a national mailing identified in their WOCN Society description as having ostomy certification and/or clinical expertise. The sample was asked to quantify degree of validity of the survey’s stomal and peristomal complications interventions. 4 Secondly, they were asked to rank interventions for each stomal and peristomal complication for being first line second line, and third line treatment. Hand-written qualitative comments of the participants were transcribed, analyzed, and themes derived. In total, 281 returned the survey, a response rate of 28%.
Results: On a scale of 1 to 4, the mean score for all interventions was 3.47 (relevant/very relevant (SD = .29). The overall survey’s Content Validity Index 4 was .84 (out of 1). Ranking of most preferred treatments revealed preferred approaches in some clinical situations and some less so.
Qualitative analysis of participants’ comments about each stomal and peristomal complication intervention and about the instrument and research process was conducted generating positive and negative themes.
Conclusion:
The proposed stomal and peristomal interventions were rated as generally valid substantiating results of an earlier study.1 The ranking of most preferred treatments for stomal and peristomal complications provides, to the authors’ knowledge, the world’s first research support for prioritized approaches and evidence-based practice in ostomy care.