Meaning of Receiving Artificial Nutritional Support in People in the Postoperative Period of Abdominal Surgery

  • Nieves Fuentes González Nurse, Masters in Nursing. Assistant professor, Universidad de Boyacá, Tunja, Colombia. Email: nfuentes@uniboyaca.edu.co
  • Alejandra Fuentes Ramírez Nurse, PhD in Nursing. Universidad de La Sabana. Chía, Colombia. Email: alejandrafuera@unisabana.edu.co
Keywords: nutritional support, parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, qualitative research,, postoperative period

Abstract

Objective. This work sought to describe the meaning of receiving artificial nutritional support in people in the postoperative period of abdominal surgery.

Methods. This was a qualitative study of grounded theory, following the guidelines by Corbin and Strauss. The information was collected through 26 in-depth interviews with 21 participants, interned in a tier III health care hospital in the city of Tunja, Colombia.

Results. The study describes four categories, which account for the way in which the person experiences physical, physiological, emotional, and social changes when receiving artificial nutritional support. The categories include stopping eating and becoming artificially fed, decreasing the ability to move to recover movement, experiencing the difficulty of having artificial nutritional support, and reaching the disease to transform life. The data analysis shows that the basic surgical pathology and the artificial nutritional support are sudden events that fragment the daily life of the person. These individuals demand the mobilization of religious, family, and social resources to strengthen the person’s internal and external environment and, thus, achieve the health situation.

Conclusions. The analysis of the meanings shows how the person reflects and interprets the reality of receiving artificial nutritional support, an event that has implicit physical discomfort, emotional changes, and physical appearance, which are determinants in the behavior and practice of artificial nutrition. However, artificial nutritional support becomes for the person an alternative to live and recover the state of health.

|Abstract
= 160 veces | PDF
= 105 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F, Higashiguchi T, Hübner M, Klek S, et al. ESPEN Guideline: Clinical Nutrition in
Surgery. Clin. Nutr. 2017; 36: 623-50.
2. Baca GP, Peña M. Prevalencia de sub-alimentación de pacientes con soporte enteral en el Centro Médico Lic. Adolfo
López Mateos. Nutr. Hosp. 2015; 31(4):1597-1602.
3. Ulíbarri JI, Lobo G, Pérez AJ. Desnutrición clínica y riesgo nutricional en 2015. Nutr Clin Med. 2015. 9(3):231-54.
4. Cederholm T, Barazzoni R, Austin P, Ballmer P, Biolo G, Bischoff SC., et al. ESPEN guidelines on definitions and
terminology of clinical nutrition. Clin. Nutr. 2017; 36(1):49-64.
5. Montoya IM, Ortí R, Ferrer E, Martín D, Montejano R. Evaluación del efecto de una intervención en el estado
nutricional de pacientes hospitalizados. Med. Clin. 2016; 148(7):1-6.
6. Correia MI, Perman MI, Linetzky Waitzberg D. Hospital malnutrition in Latin America: A systematic review. Clin.
Nutr. 2017;36(4): 958-67.
7. Larse Lk, Uhrenfeldt L. Patients’ lived experiences of a reduced intake of food and drinks during illness: a literature
review. Scand. J. Caring Sci. 2013; 27:184–94.
8. Hopkinson JB. Food connections: A qualitative exploratory study of weight- and eating-related distress in families
affected by advanced cancer. Eur. J Oncol. Nurs. 2016; 20:87-96.
9. Winkler MF, Wetle T, Smith C, Hagan E, O’Sullivan Maillet J, Touger-Decker R. The meaning of food and eating
among home parenteral nutrition–dependent adults with intestinal failure: a qualitative inquiry. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
2010; 110(11):1676-83.
10. Strauss A, Corbin J. Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar teoría
fundamentada. [Spanish translation]. Medellín: Editorial Universidad de Antioquia; 2012.
11. Sousa ML, Prado ML, Monticelli M, Cometto MC, Gómez PF. Investigación cualitativa en Enfermería metodología y
didáctica. Washington, D.C: OPS; 2013.
12. Ministerio de Salud. Resolución número 8430/93 de 4 de octubre. Por la cual se establecen las normas científicas,
técnicas y administrativas para la investigación en salud. Bogotá: El Ministerio; 1993.
13. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. Lineamientos de buenas prácticas ambientales [Internet]. Bogotá
D.C. 2016. Available in: http://es.presidencia.gov.co/dapre/DocumentosSIGEPRE/L-TH-01-buenas-practicasambientales.pdf.
14. Soneira AJ. La «Teoría fundamentada en los datos» (Grounded Theory) de Glaser y Strauss. En: Vasilachis de
Gialdino I, Ameigeiras AR, Chernobilsky LB, Giménez Béliveau V, Mallimaci F, Mendizábal N, et al. Estrategias de
investigación cualitativa. Barcelona: Gedisa editorial; 2006. P. 153-72.
15. Rattray M, Marshall AP, Desbrow B, Roberts S. A qualitative exploration of patients’ experiences with
and perceptions of recommencing feeding after colorectal surgery. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2019; 32(1):63-71.
16. Hope K, Ferguson M, Reidlinger DP, Agarwal E. I don’t eat when I’m sick: Older people’s food and mealtime
experiences in hospital. Maturitas. 2017; 97(1):6–13.
17. Lozano-Ballena S, Meléndez-Ramírez F, Poma-Ortiz J, Díaz-Vélez C. Estado nutricional del paciente adulto mayor
hospitalizado usuario de sonda nasogástrica en un Hospital del Seguro Social, Perú. Rev. Cuerpo Méd. HNAAA.
2018; 11(3):142-8.
18. Sorrel T, Burden A, Debra J, Jones A, Matthew Gittins A, Joanne Ablett B, et al. Needs-based quality of life in
adult’s dependent on home parenteral nutrition. Clin. Nutr. 2019; 38(1):1433-38.
19. Wong C, Lucas B, Wood D. Patients’ experiences with home parenteral nutrition: A grounded theory study. Clin.
Nutr. ESPEN. 2018; 24:100-8.
20. Tobberup R, Thoresen L, Falkmer UG, Yilmaz KM, Solheim TS, Balstad TR. Effects of current parenteral nutrition
treatment on health-related quality of life, physical function, nutritional status, survival and adverse events
exclusively in patients with advanced cancer: A systematic literature review. Crit. Rev. Oncolog. Hematol. 2019;
139:96-107.
21. Jaafar MH, Mahadeva S, Morgan K, Pin TM. Systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies on the
attitudes and barriers to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding. Clini. Nutr. 2016; 35(1):1226-35.
22. Halliday V, Baker M, Thomas AL, Bowrey D. Patient and Family Caregivers’ Experiences of Living With a Jejunostomy
Feeding Tube After Surgery for Esophagogastric Cancer. JPEN Parenter. Enteral Nutr. 2017; 41(5):837-43.
23. Garimella R, Koenig HG, Larson DL, Hultman CS. Of These, Faith, Hope, and Love Assessing and Providing for the
Psychosocial and Spiritual Needs of Burn Patients. Clin. Plastic Surg. 2017; 44(1):893–902.
24. Balboni TA, Balboni MJ. The Spiritual Event of Serious Illness. J. Pain Symptom Manag. 2018; 56(5):816-22.
Published
2020-07-10
How to Cite
Fuentes González, N., & Fuentes Ramírez, A. (2020). Meaning of Receiving Artificial Nutritional Support in People in the Postoperative Period of Abdominal Surgery. Investigación Y Educación En Enfermería, 38(2). https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v38n2e08.
Section
ORIGINAL ARTICLES / ARTÍCULOS ORIGINALES / ARTIGOS ORIGINAIS