A qualitative investigation into the psychological experiences of patients undergoing thoracotomy for the removal of intraesophageal fishbone
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Esophageal foreign bodies, especially fish bones, are common emergencies that may require surgery like thoracotomy. Psychological impacts such as pain and anxiety are often overlooked. This study explores patients’ psychological experiences during diagnosis, treatment, and recovery to inform effective interventions and improve outcomes. METHODS: Between May 2022 and May 2023, we employed a purposive sampling technique to select 12 patients who had undergone thoracotomy for the removal of intraesophageal fishbone as participants in our study. Utilizing a phenomenological research framework, we conducted semi-structured interviews and applied Colaizzi’s seven-step method for data analysis to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: The psychological experiences of patients at different stages of thoracotomy for intraesophageal fishbone removal can be summarized into five themes: assumptions during the event, helplessness and dependence before surgery, feelings of fatigue after surgery, sense of benefit during the recovery period, and gratitude and hope. CONCLUSION: It is imperative for healthcare professionals to prioritize the psychological rehabilitation of patients by implementing personalized interventions. This approach should aim to facilitate both physical and mental recovery, thereby fostering a renewed sense of hope and well-being in patients.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A qualitative investigation into the psychological experiences of patients undergoing thoracotomy for the removal of intraesophageal fishbone
- Date Crossref
- 18/11/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.