The aim of the Ostomy Life Study was to get a better understanding of the challenges that people living with a stoma face in their everyday livee. With more than 4000 participants from 11 countries, the study provides a wealth of information covering all age groups, stoma types, stoma products and a variety of cultures. The result shows that the majority of ostomates have issues related to leakage and ballooning which, among other things, have a negative effect on sleep, or lead to unplanned appliance changes for approximately 40% of the respondents. Two-piece users are concerned specifically about coupling failure and the associated consequences. The results can be used to provide guidance in everyday stoma care and in development of new products.

Aims and objectives Describe and compare current surgical wound care practices across two hospitals in two health services districts, Australia. Background Surgical site infections (SSI) are a complication of surgery and occur in up to 9.5% of surgical procedures, yet they are preventable. Despite the existence of clinical guidelines for SSI prevention, there remains high variation in wound care practice. Design Prospective comparative design using structured observations and chart audit. Methods A specifically developed audit tool was used to collect data on observed wound care practices, documentation of wound assessment and practice, and patients’ clinical characteristics from patients’ electronic medical records. Structured observations of a consecutive sample of surgical patients receiving wound care with a convenience sample of nurses were undertaken. The manuscript adheres to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. Results In total, 154 nurses undertaking acute wound care and 257 surgical patients who received wound care were observed. Across hospitals, hand hygiene adherence after dressing change was lowest (Hospital A: 8/113, 7%; Hospital B: 16/144, 11%; χ2: 8.93, p = .347). Most wound dressing practices were similar across sites, except hand hygiene prior to dressing change (Hospital A: 107/113, 95%; Hospital B: 131/144, 91%; (χ2: 7.736, p = .021) and use of clean gloves using nontouch technique (Hospital A: 88/113, 78%; Hospital B: 90/144, 63%; χ2: 8.313, p = .016). The most commonly documented wound characteristic was wound type (Hospital A: 43/113, 38%; Hospital B: 70/144, 49%). What nurses documented differed significantly across sites (p < .05). Conclusions Clinical variations in wound care practice are likely influenced by clinical context. Relevance to clinical practice Using an evidence‐based approach to surgical wound management will help reduce patients’ risk of wound‐related complications.

A new mouldable seal, Brava® Protective Seal, was evaluated by patients on aspects related to residue, durability, and preference. A total of 135 patients from four countries participated (Denmark, Germany, Japan and the USA) and the new product was compared to the patients' usual pouching systems. Less residue and easier skin cleansing was observed, which may benefit patient quality of life. The possible benefits of less residue for peristomal skin health need further investigation.

Introduction: Surgical wound care requires an interprofessional approach; however, there is considerable variation in practice and a lack of robust evidence to guide clinicians. Thus, it is important to identify priority areas from the perspectives of end-users to target efforts to both generate and implement high quality evidence. Objective: To rank the top four priority questions in wound management across two health districts to inform future research and implementation efforts in wound care. Methods: A multisite modified nominal group technique was used to build consensus. Two interactive two-hour workshops were held across two health services districts. Participants were recruited from nursing, allied health and medicine. In preparation for the workshops, a standard operating procedure was developed, and 25 wound care priority questions identified, a priori. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse workshop data. Results: Across districts, 38 health professionals participated in the workshops. From a list of 25 clinical questions, the top 10 were determined, and from these, the top four. The number one priority question identified by 23/38 (60.5%) participants across districts related to patients' understanding/knowledge of their wound treatment. The number two priority question 15/38 (39.5%) participants voted on focussed on patient involvement in wound care. Conclusions: Overall, the priority questions reflect the need to encourage patient participation in wound care. These wound care priorities can be used to inform future research and improvement efforts in wound care.

Aim: The Ostomy Life Study 2019 aimed to obtain a better understanding of the challenges faced by people with stoma. Methods: Online survey with participants from 17 countries. Findings: Of the 54 614 individuals invited to take part, 5187 responded; 62% of the respondents avoided physical and social activities because of their stoma and 37% had never consulted their stoma care nurse to have the fit of their stoma product checked. In a subgroup receiving questions on leakage (n=4209), output under the baseplate and leakage onto clothes were experienced within the previous month by 76% and 26% of respondents, respectively. Higher chance of leakage was associated with an irregular stoma shape and peristomal body profile; a stoma level at or below the skin surface; and the presence of creases, folds and other changes in the peristomal area. Conclusion: Leakage and access to a stoma care nurse to provide the necessary care and guidance remain important concerns for individuals with a stoma.