Skip to main content

Table 4 Association between daily non-pharmacological management practice and ward manager’s perception and organizational characteristics

From: Management of constipation in long-term care hospitals and its ward manager and organization factors

 The number of NPMs 
n = 180
 95%CI 
βLL–ULp
Characteristics of the organization
 Creating nursing care plan for CM (ref: non-existent)0.190.14–0.920.008      
 Organizational climate of the learning atmosphere0.13−0.01–0.170.069      
Characteristics of ward manager
 Perception; beliefs regarding use of laxatives0.14−0.001–0.570.051      
 Perception; preference of using laxatives0.06−0.17–0.410.407      
 Adjusted R2  0.167      
 Dietary fiber productProbiotic productNon-use of SL on the consecutive day
n = 202n = 217n = 181
 95%CI  95%CI  95%CI 
ORLL–ULpORLL–ULpORLL–ULp
Characteristics of the organization
 Case conference for BM in the ward (ref: non-existent)2.261.12–4.280.012      
 Organizational climate of the learning atmosphere0.980.85–1.130.7951.301.11–1.530.0011.090.93–1.280.281
 RF of time of bowel movement (ref: non-existent)2.691.40–5.180.003      
 RF of stool consistency using BSFS (ref: non-existent)   2.811.31–6.060.0082.771.28–5.990.01
Characteristics of ward manager
 Age      0.950.90–0.990.014
 Participation in the in-hospital study session2.311.21–4.430.012      
 Knowledge of stimulant laxative      2.341.23–4.460.01
 Perception; beliefs regarding use of laxatives1.310.83–2.060.2511.691.04–2.750.0350.710.42–1.200.201
 Perception; preference of using laxatives1.380.87–2.210.1750.720.44–1.170.1850.700.41–1.180.18
 Nagelkerke R20.1810.1460.171
  1. Note: Missing data were excluded from this analysis and percentages for each item were calculated after excluding missing values. Abbreviations: NPM non-pharmacological management, CM constipation management, BM bowel management, RF record fields, BSFS Bristol Stool Form Scale, CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio, LL lower limit, UL upper limit, ref. reference
  2. The following variables were controlled: the number of hospitalized patients per LTC ward, the number of patients receiving nutrition by gastric feeding tube, and the number of patients receiving total parenteral nutrition. The following variables were used via the forced entry method: organizational climate of the learning atmosphere, beliefs regarding use of laxatives, Preference of using laxatives
  3. The following variables were used besides the independent variables used in forward selection to assess each outcome: The number of NPM; the average length of stay, bed occupancy rate, the number of patients using a diaper, the availability of case conferences regarding CM in the wards, RF of amount of stool. Use of dietary fiber products; the number of patients using a diaper, staff participation in in-hospital study sessions, staff participation in out-hospital study sessions. Use of probiotic products; ward manager’s participation in out-hospital study sessions, staff participation in out-hospital study sessions. Non-use of SL on the consecutive day; the average length of stay, RF of amount of stool, age of ward manager, ward manager’s participation in an academic conference, staff participation in out-hospital study sessions