Table 3.

Characteristics of included studies: outcomes and findings.

Study	Time points of assessment	Outcome measures	Tool	Findings
28	At time of discharge 1 month after discharge 3 months after discharge	State and trait anxiety Stoma self-efficacy Stoma complication Stoma quality of life Care satisfaction	STAI SSES SCPC Stoma–QOL CS	EP had less anxiety; better self-efficacy; fewer complications; better quality of life scores and were more satisfied with the care.
29	At time of discharge 4 weeks after discharge 12 weeks after discharge	Stoma self-efficacy Stoma quality of life Stoma complication Stoma reversal Care satisfaction	SSES Stoma–QOL SCPC OSR CS	EP had significantly improved self-efficacy; quality of life; significantly lower stoma complications. The stoma reversal in EP was more likely to occur and to occur earlier. EP reporting higher satisfaction.
30	At time of discharge 6 weeks after discharge 12 weeks after discharge	Stoma-related data Sexual satisfaction	QIIS GRISS	EP had significantly improved the GRISS scores.
31	Within 30 days of discharge (satisfaction was measured at 2–3 months after discharge)	Hospital readmissions Acute kidney injury Care satisfaction Medical costs	– – CS –	EP did not reduce hospital readmissions or readmissions for Acute Kidney Injury. EP was neither costly nor cost-saving, and it did not increase patient satisfaction.
32	2 weeks of discharge 4 weeks after discharge 12 weeks after discharge	Stoma complications Quality of life Outpatient frequency Medical costs	– Stoma–QOL – –	In EP more patients had stoma complications/QoL were significantly better. There was no difference between groups in frequency of outpatient and medical costs.
33	At time of discharge 1 month after discharge 3 months after discharge	Stoma adjustment Stoma self-efficacy Care satisfaction Stoma complications	OAS SSES CS SCPC	EP had significantly better stoma adjustment; higher stoma self-efficacy; higher satisfaction with care; less stoma complications.
27	6 months after discharge	Anxiety Depression Stoma quality of life Stoma complications Care satisfaction Stoma knowledge	SAS SDS Stoma–QOL – CS –	In EP: SAS and SDS scores were significantly lower; QOL score was significantly higher; stoma complications were significantly lower; care satisfaction was significantly higher; and knowledge of stoma care was significantly higher.
34	At time of discharge 1 month after discharge 3 months after discharge	Ostomy adjustment Stoma self-efficacy Stoma complications	OAI-23 SSES SCPC	In EP: adjustment and stoma self-efficacy score were significantly higher; stoma complications were tending to reduce.
35	At time of discharge 3 month after discharge 6 months after discharge	Resilience Self-care agency Quality of Life Stoma complications	CD-RISC ESCA Stoma–QOL SCPC	In EP: the psychological resilience, self-care ability and quality of life were significantly better; the complications were significantly lower.

Abbreviations: CD-RISC, Connor Davidson resilience scale; CS, care satisfaction (Likert 5 grade score); EP, experimental group; ESCA, exercise of self-care agency scale; GRISS, Golombok–Rust inventory of sexual satisfaction; QIIS, Questionnaire for Individuals with Intestinal Stoma; OAI-23, Ostomy Adjustment Inventory-23; OAS, Ostomy adjustment scale; OSR: outcomes of stoma reversal; SAS, self-rating anxiety scale; SCPC, stoma complication preset checklist; SDS, self-rating depression scale; SSES, stoma self-efficacy scale; STAI, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; Stoma-QOL, stoma quality of life scale; -, not reported.