Differences in Ostomy Pouch Seal Leakage Occurrences Between North American and European Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare experiences and concerns about pouch seal leakage between persons with ostomies residing in North America (Canada and the United States) and Europe (United Kingdom, Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Belgium, France, and Italy). Differences in reported pouch wear time and accessories used between the 2 groups were also examined. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional study (Ostomy Life Study). SUBJECTS AND SETTINGS: Responses from persons residing in European countries (n = 1939) were compared with responses of 1387 individuals residing in North American countries. METHODS: Persons with an ostomy completed a questionnaire that focused on 4 topics related to the daily use of an ostomy pouching system (pouch seal leakage, ballooning, appearance of pouching system such as color and size of the pouch and whether it is discrete under clothing, and coupling failure of 2-piece pouching systems). Pouch seal leakage was defined as stomal effluent seeping between the skin and the wafer of the ostomy pouching system. Statistical analysis was performed using a proportional odds model including various variable effects. Special attention was given to frequency of pouch seal leakage occurrences. All tests were 2-sided; P values ≤.05 were deemed statistically significant. RESULTS: Participants living in the North American countries indicated they were more likely to experience leakage from the ostomy (odds ratio = 2.610, 95% CI 2.187-3.115; P < .0001). Findings also indicated they were more likely to worry about pouch seal leakage than those in the European countries' data set (odds ratio = 2.722, 95% CI 2.283-3.246; P < .0001). Participants residing in the North American countries had significantly longer wear times than those participants in the European countries (P < .0001, χ test). The use of accessories was associated with a longer pouching system wear time. CONCLUSION: Study results suggest that participants from the North American countries indicated significantly more experience with and worries about leakage and longer wear time than the participants from the European population. Additional research is needed to determine the reasons for these differences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".