PURPOSE: To explore the significance of psychological interventions in the nursing care of rectal cancer patients undergoing ostomy surgery. METHODS: We recruited 120 rectal cancer patients undergoing ostomy surgery in our hospital from March 2017 to March 2018 as the study cohort, and they were equally and randomly divided into a control group and an observation group. The control group was administered routine nursing, and the observation group was administered routine nursing combined with psychological nursing. The patients' conditions were evaluated using the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), the self-rating depression scale (SDS), the MOS item short form health survey (SF-36), and their defecation. The two groups' satisfaction levels with the nursing were also compared. RESULTS: The SAS, SDS, HAMA, and HAMD scores in the two groups after the treatment were lower than they were before the treatment, and the observation group was much lower. The SF-36 scores, the patients' defecation, the nursing satisfaction levels, and the sleep durations in the observation group were higher than they were in the control group, and there were fewer incidences of postoperative complications in the observation group than there were in the control group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The effects of psychological interventions in the nursing of rectal cancer patients undergoing ostomy surgery are significant. The interventions can relieve the patients' bad moods, stabilize the patients' conditions, and improve the patients' defecation, so it is superior to routine nursing. AJTR
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To explore the significance of psychological interventions in the nursing care of rectal cancerpatients undergoing ostomy surgery. METHODS: We recruited 120 rectal cancerpatients undergoing ostomy surgery in our hospital from March 2017 to March 2018 as the study cohort, and they were equally and randomly divided into a control group and an observation group. The control group was administered routine nursing, and the observation group was administered routine nursing combined with psychological nursing. The patients' conditions were evaluated using the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), the self-rating depression scale (SDS), the MOS item short form health survey (SF-36), and their defecation. The two groups' satisfaction levels with the nursing were also compared. RESULTS: The SAS, SDS, HAMA, and HAMD scores in the two groups after the treatment were lower than they were before the treatment, and the observation group was much lower. The SF-36 scores, the patients' defecation, the nursing satisfaction levels, and the sleep durations in the observation group were higher than they were in the control group, and there were fewer incidences of postoperative complications in the observation group than there were in the control group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The effects of psychological interventions in the nursing of rectal cancerpatients undergoing ostomy surgery are significant. The interventions can relieve the patients' bad moods, stabilize the patients' conditions, and improve the patients' defecation, so it is superior to routine nursing. AJTR
Authors: Catherine E Mosher; Joseph G Winger; Barbara A Given; Paul R Helft; Bert H O'Neil Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Karen M Tuesley; Susan J Jordan; Dan J Siskind; Bradley J Kendall; Steve Kisely Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2018-12-02 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Shane Lloyd; David Baraghoshi; Randa Tao; Ignacio Garrido-Laguna; Glynn W Gilcrease; Jonathan Whisenant; John R Weis; Courtney Scaife; Thomas B Pickron; Lyen C Huang; Marcus M Monroe; Sarah Abdelaziz; Alison M Fraser; Ken R Smith; Vikrant Deshmukh; Michael Newman; Kerry G Rowe; John Snyder; Niloy J Samadder; Mia Hashibe Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Justin C Brown; Nevena Damjanov; Kerry S Courneya; Andrea B Troxel; Babette S Zemel; Michael R Rickels; Bonnie Ky; Andrew D Rhim; Anil K Rustgi; Kathryn H Schmitz Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Le Cai; Gerd Ahlström; Pingfen Tang; Ke Ma; David Edvardsson; Lina Behm; Haiyan Fu; Jie Zhang; Jiqun Yang Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-08-28 Impact factor: 2.692