References
- Kettle J. StoMap programme baseline report; 2019. p. 29. https://www.eoecph.nhs.uk/Files/Integrated%20Care/StoMap%20Baseline%20Report%20FINAL.pdf
- Pandiaraja J, Chakkarapani R, Arumugam S. A study on patterns, indications, and complications of an enteric stoma. J Family Med Prim Care. 2021;10(9):3277–3282.
- Perrin A. Exploring individuals’ perceptions of living with a stoma. Br J Nurs. 2019;28(16):S18–S22.
- Ananthan M, Gomathi V, Praveen P. Colostomy – a life saving procedure? Int J Adv Res. 2018;6(5):1007–1010.
- Bladder & Bowel UK. Are British public attitudes towards people with stomas improving? [Internet]; 2020 [cited 2022 Jan 6]. Available from: https://www.bbuk.org.uk/blog/are-british-public-attitudes-towards-people-with-stomas-improving/
- United Ostomy Associations of America. What is an ostomy? United Ostomy Associations of America [Internet]; 2022 [cited 2022 Jan 6]. Available from: https://www.ostomy.org/what-is-an-ostomy/
- Mols F, Lemmens V, Bosscha K, et al. Living with the physical and mental consequences of an ostomy: a study among 1–10-year rectal cancer survivors from the population-based PROFILES registry. Psychooncology. 2014;23(9):998–1004.
- Nichols TR. Quality of life in persons living with an ostomy assessed using the SF36v2: mental component summary: vitality, social function, role-emotional, and mental health. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2016;43(6):616–622.
- Carlsson E, Fingren J, Hallén A-M, et al. The prevalence of ostomy-related complications 1 year after ostomy surgery: a prospective, descriptive, clinical study. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2016;62:34–48.
- Ayik C, Özden D, Cenan D. Ostomy complications, risk factors, and applied nursing care: a retrospective, descriptive study. Wound Manag Prev. 2020;66(9):20–30.
- Krishnamurty D, Blatnik J, Mutch M. Stoma complications. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2017;30(3):193–200.
- Abdalla MI, Sandler RS, Kappelman MD, et al. The impact of ostomy on quality of life and functional status of Crohn’s disease patients. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2016;22(11):2658–2664.
- Dabirian A, Yaghmaei F, Rassouli M, et al. Quality of life in ostomy patients: a qualitative study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2010;5:1–5.
- Down G, Vestergaard M, Ajslev TA, et al. Perception of leakage: data from the ostomy life study 2019. Br J Nurs. 2021;30(22):S4–S12.
- Nafees B, Størling ZM, Hindsberger C, et al. The ostomy leak impact tool: development and validation of a new patient-reported tool to measure the burden of leakage in ostomy device users. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):231.
- Martins L, Down G, Andersen BD, et al. The ostomy skin tool 2.0: a new instrument for assessing peristomal skin changes. Br J Nurs. 2022;31(8).
- Herlufsen P, Olsen AG, Carlsen B, et al. Study of peristomal skin disorders in patients with permanent stomas. Br J Nurs. 2006;15(16):854–862.
- Martins L, Samai O, Fernández A, et al. Maintaining healthy skin around an ostomy: peristomal skin disorders and self-assessment. Gastrointest Nurs. 2011;9(Suppl. 2):9–13.
- Fellows J, Voegeli D, Håkan-Bloch J, et al. Multinational survey on living with an ostomy: prevalence and impact of peristomal skin complications. Br J Nurs. 2021;30(16):S22–S30.
- McClure NS, Sayah FA, Xie F, et al. Instrument-defined estimates of the minimally important difference for EQ-5D-5L index scores. Value Health. 2017;20(4):644–650.
- Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 1996;5(2):141–154.
- Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 1997;35:1095–1108.
- Dolan P. The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. J Health Econ. 1998;17(1):39–52.
- Dolan P. Aggregating health state valuations. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1997;2(3):160–165.
- Dolan P, Jones-Lee M. The time trade-off: a note on the effect of lifetime reallocation of consumption and discounting. J Health Econ. 1997;16(6):731–739.
- Torrance G. Preferences for health outcomes and cost–utility analysis. J Manag Care. 1997;3:8–20.
- Torrance GW, Furlong W, Feeny D. Health utility estimation. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2002;2(2):99–108.
- Robinson A, Dolan P, Williams A. Valuing health status using VAS and TTO: what lies behind the numbers? Soc Sci Med. 1997;45(8):1289–1297.
- Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1989;5(4):559–575.
- WHO. Life tables for WHO member states; [Internet]; 2019. Available from: http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.687?lang=en
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. Process and methods [Internet]; 2013 [cited 2021 Jul 8]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/resources/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf-2007975843781
- Atkinson SE, Wilson PW. Comparing mean efficiency and productivity scores from small samples: a bootstrap methodology. J Prod Anal. 1995;6(2):137–152.
- Efron B. Nonparametric estimates of standard error: the jackknife, the bootstrap and other methods. Biometrika. 1981;68(3):589–599.
- Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ. 1997;6(4):327–340.
- Chang W, Collins E, Kerrigan C. An internet-based utility assessment of breast hypertrophy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(2):370–377.
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Single technology appraisal (STA): specification for manufacturer/sponsor submission of evidence. NICE [Internet]. NICE; 2012. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/media/default/about/what-we-do/nice-guidance/nice-technology-appraisals/specification-formanufacturer-sponsor-submission-of-evidence-june-2012.doc
- Yang Y, Brazier J, Longworth L. EQ-5D in skin conditions: an assessment of validity and responsiveness. Eur J Health Econ. 2015;16(9):927–939.
- Capucci S, Hahn-Pedersen J, Vilsbøll A, et al. Impact of atopic dermatitis and chronic hand eczema on quality of life compared with other chronic diseases. Dermatitis. 2020;31(3):178–184.
- Bell CM, Chapman RH, Stone PW, et al. An off-the-Shelf help list: a comprehensive catalog of preference scores from published cost–utility analyses. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(4):288–294.
- 2 Health-related quality of life for people with long-term conditions [Internet]. NHS Digit; 2022 [cited 2022 Mar 30]. Available from: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/nhs-outcomes-framework/march-2022/domain-2---enhancing-quality-of-life-for-people-with-long-term-conditions-nof/2-health-related-quality-of-life-for-people-with-long-term-conditions
- NHS Digital. Health related quality of life for people with long-term conditions; 2019.
- Menzel P, Dolan P, Richardson J, et al. The role of adaptation to disability and disease in health state valuation: a preliminary normative analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2002;55(12):2149–2158.
- Statista. Countries with the highest internet penetration rate 2021; [Internet]; 2022 [cited 2022 Jan 6]. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/227082/countries-with-the-highest-internet-penetration-rate/