| Literature DB >> 34335750 |
Xicai Sun1, Weifeng Zhong2, Jingjing Lu3, Wenzhen Zhuang4.
Abstract
In order to explore the clinical effect of psychological nursing intervention on postoperative chemotherapy for rectal cancer, 120 cases of rectal cancer patients were selected as the research subjects. The control group received conventional nursing treatment after operation, and the research group received comprehensive psychological nursing intervention on this basis. The self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) scores, self-rating depression scale (SDS) scores, hope level scores, nursing satisfaction, mental state changes, treatment compliance, and immune function of two groups were analyzed and compared. There was no significant difference between the two groups of patients in the preoperative SAS, SDS, and hope level scale scores. After the intervention, postoperative SAS and SDS scores and CD8+ value of the research group were significantly lower than those of the control group. In contrast, the postoperative hope level score, treatment compliance, and postoperative CD4+/CD8+ of the research group were significantly higher, and the nursing satisfaction was better than that of the control group. The application of psychological nursing intervention in postoperative chemotherapy for patients with rectal cancer can effectively relieve anxiety and depression of patients, promote patients to establish a healthy and coordinated mental state, improve treatment compliance, improve immune function, and promote disease recovery.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34335750 PMCID: PMC8315871 DOI: 10.1155/2021/1071490
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oncol ISSN: 1687-8450 Impact factor: 4.375
Comparison of general information of subjects in the intervention group and the control group, n(%).
| Variables | Control ( | Research ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.368 | 0.926 | ||
| Male | 32 (57.14) | 37 (57.81) | ||
| Female | 24 (42.86) | 27 (42.19) | ||
|
| ||||
| Age (years) | 53.29 ± 8.61 | 52.56 ± 8.25 | 0.429 | 0.713 |
| <40 | 4 (7.14) | 6 (9.37) | ||
| 40∼50 | 12 (21.42) | 18 (28.13) | ||
| 51∼60 | 20 (35.72) | 22 (34.37) | ||
| >60 | 20 (35.72) | 18 (28.13) | ||
|
| ||||
| Education | 0.942 | 0.246 | ||
| Junior high school and above | 15 (26.79) | 18 (28.12) | ||
| High school and junior college | 32 (57.14) | 35 (54.69) | ||
| Bachelor degree or above | 9 (16.07) | 11 (17.19) | ||
|
| ||||
| Marriage status | 1.946 | 0.425 | ||
| Unmarried | 4 (7.14) | 4 (6.25) | ||
| Married | 46 (82.14) | 50 (78.13) | ||
| Divorced | 6 (10.72) | 10 (15.62) | ||
Comparison of SAS and SDS scores between the two groups.
| Grading index | Scoring stage | Control | Research |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAS | Preoperation | 58.2 ± 8.6 | 58.1 ± 8.8 | 0.35 | 0.625 |
| Postoperative | 47.5 ± 7.3 | 39.8 ± 7.5 | 6.24 | 0.035 | |
|
| |||||
| SDS | Preoperation | 56.5 ± 7.9 | 55.6 ± 7.9 | 0.29 | 0.158 |
| Postoperative | 45.9 ± 7.5 | 38.4 ± 7.3 | 7.01 | 0.022 | |
Figure 1Comparison of SAS and SDS scores between the two groups.
Comparison of SAS and SDS scores between the two groups before and after nursing n (%).
| Group | Case | Very satisfied | Basic satisfaction | Dissatisfaction | Total satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research | 64 | 33 (51.56) | 29 (45.31) | 2 (3.13) | 62 (96.88) |
| Control | 56 | 24 (42.86) | 21 (37.50) | 11 (19.64) | 45 (80.36) |
|
| 6.124 | ||||
|
| 0.014 |
Comparison of HHI scores between the two groups .
| Group | Attitude towards reality and the future | Attitude of taking positive actions | Attitude of other people's intimacy | Total score | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperation | Postoperative | Preoperation | Postoperative | Preoperation | Postoperative | Preoperation | Postoperative | |
| Research | 7.38 ± 1.36 | 12.11 ± 1.72 | 8.69 ± 1.78 | 13.81 ± 1.49 | 8.04 ± 1.92 | 13.82 ± 1.86 | 24.55 ± 2.18 | 39.85 ± 2.24 |
| Control | 7.04 ± 1.31 | 10.99 ± 1.38 | 8.82 ± 1.66 | 11.34 ± 1.56 | 7.96 ± 1.98 | 12.56 ± 1.88 | 24.13 ± 2.11 | 34.62 ± 2.16 |
|
| −0.871 | −2.972 | 0.245 | −5.956 | 0.069 | −2.561 | −0.278 | −7.922 |
|
| 0.554 | 0.038 | 0.721 | 0.011 | 1.116 | 0.024 | 0.714 | 0.008 |
Compliance comparison between the two groups, n(%).
| Group | Case | Complete compliance | Basic compliance | Noncompliance | Total compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research | 64 | 31 (48.44) | 26 (40.63) | 7 (10.93) | 57 (89.06) |
| Control | 56 | 16 (28.57) | 24 (42.86) | 16 (28.57) | 40 (71.43) |
|
| 5.05 | ||||
|
| 0.032 |
Comparison of immune function between the two groups .
| Scoring index | Scoring stage | Control | Research |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD4 | Before intervention | 38.3 ± 7.26 | 38.1 ± 7.32 | 0.24 | 0.152 |
| After intervention | 39.5 ± 8.01 | 46.9 ± 7.95 | 5.91 | 0.031 | |
|
| |||||
| CD8 | Before intervention | 37.2 ± 7.44 | 36.8 ± 7.06 | 0.21 | 0.445 |
| After intervention | 37.8 ± 7.52 | 31.2 ± 7.13 | 3.98 | 0.021 | |
|
| |||||
| CD4+/CD8+ | Before intervention | 1.03 ± 0.28 | 1.03 ± 0.24 | 0 | 0.351 |
| After intervention | 1.09 ± 0.29 | 1.5 ± 0.34 | 7.51 | 0.015 | |