4.6 Article

Patients' daily life experiences five years after gastric bypass surgery a qualitative study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING
Volume 25, Issue 3-4, Pages 322-331

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13049

Keywords

gastric bypass surgery; in-depth interviews; qualitative method; weight loss

Categories

Funding

  1. Helse Vest
  2. Helse Fonna
  3. Stavanger University hospital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim and objective. The objective was to explore and describe patients' daily life experiences five years after gastric bypass surgery. Background. Bariatric surgery markedly decreases body weight. Previous studies describe positive consequences, as well as physical, social and emotional challenges during the first few years after surgery. An understanding of how patients adjust to and cope with postsurgical changes in the long term is crucial to help them obtain a successful outcome after bariatric surgery. Method. A qualitative method was employed. In-depth interviews with 10 men and women were conducted five years after bariatric surgery in a Norwegian hospital. Results. One overarching theme - a multitude of daily life changes following bariatric surgery - was developed based on three main themes: relational aspects related to weight loss, the new body and changes in self-esteem. Six sub-themes are described. Conclusion. Those who undergo gastric bypass surgery experience enormous changes in their daily lives. Their social lives, their relationship to their body and their self-esteem may be altered by the weight loss. Relevance to clinical practice. The results of this study suggest directions for patient education, health staff education and peer education. A patient education programme focusing on changes in daily life experiences when undergoing gastric bypass surgery is suggested due to the changes experienced by the patients involved in this study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available