| Literature DB >> 34386048 |
Shirdel Zandi1, Behzad Imani2, Safarpour Gholamreza3.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the study was to determine the effect of self-care training and informational support of patients with a mechanical heart valve on the international normalized ratio (INR) and bleeding complications.Entities:
Keywords: bleeding complications; heart valve replacement; international normalized ratio; self-care
Year: 2021 PMID: 34386048 PMCID: PMC8340644 DOI: 10.5114/kitp.2021.107468
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Kardiochir Torakochirurgia Pol ISSN: 1731-5530
Educational content
| Meeting time | Content of the training session |
|---|---|
| Before surgery: | |
| First session | Describing the disease, describing surgery as a treatment method, familiarity with the types of valves and the advantages and disadvantages of each, a guide to conscious and rational choice of surgery, answering questions |
| Second session | Training in self-relaxation methods, familiarity with the operating room environment and cooperation with the surgical staff, familiarity with the ICU environment and cooperation with nurses, proper breathing, the importance of coping with nursing procedures, answering questions |
| After surgery: | |
| First session | Importance of starting activities, surgical wound care and dressing, familiarity with the importance of warfarin and prescription drugs, answering questions |
| Second session | Infection prevention methods, symptoms of surgical wound infection, prevention and diagnosis of surgical complications, answering questions |
| Third session | INR and maintenance of treatment levels, compatible diet, warfarin and prevention of drug interactions, the importance of maintaining a dynamic life, answering questions |
| Fourth session | Efforts to maintain INR at the treatment level, activity compatible, return to normal life, prevention of limitation, self-relaxation, sexual activity, ways to communicate with the treatment center, risk identification and prevention, answering questions |
Demographic characteristics of patients in both groups
| Variable | Control (n = 75) | Intervention (n = 74) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (mean ± SD) | 55.57 ±12.37 | 56.81 ±12.53 | 0.545 |
| Height (mean ± SD) | 167.05 ±6.59 | 166.16 ±7.03 | 0.426 |
| Weight (mean ± SD) | 69.57 ±9.80 | 70.02 ±8.76 | 0.766 |
| Gender | 0.795 | ||
| Male | 42 (56) | 43 (58.1) | |
| Female | 33 (44) | 31 (41.9) | |
| Marital status | 0.501 | ||
| Single | 12 (16) | 9 (12.16) | |
| Married | 63 (84) | 65 (87.84) | |
| Employment | 0.478 | ||
| Unemployed | 34 (45.33) | 35 (47.30) | |
| Self-employed | 34 (45.33) | 28 (37.84) | |
| Office worker | 7 (9.34) | 11 (14.86) | |
| Education | 0.194 | ||
| Illiterate | 31 (41.33) | 41 (55.40) | |
| Primary school | 22 (29.33) | 16 (21.62) | |
| Diploma | 15 (20) | 8 (10.81) | |
| Academic | 7 (9.34) | 9 (12.17) | |
| Residence | 0.06 | ||
| Rural | 29 (38.67) | 40 (52.5) | |
| Urban | 46 (61.33) | 34 (47.5) |
Independent t-test
χ2 test.
Demographic characteristics of patients in both groups
| Variable | Control ( | Intervention ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMI (mean ± SD) | 24.92 ±3.20 | 25.56 ±4.32 | 0.307 |
| Hypertension | 0.281 | ||
| Yes | 25 (33.33) | 31 (41.89) | |
| No | 50 (66.67) | 43 (58.11) | |
| Diabetes | 0.608 | ||
| Yes | 9 (11.84) | 11 (14.86) | |
| No | 66 (88.16) | 63 (85.13) | |
| Dyslipidemia | 0.729 | ||
| Yes | 18 (24) | 16 (21.62) | |
| No | 57 (76) | 58 (78.38) | |
| Smoking habit | 0.538 | ||
| Yes | 17 (22.67) | 20 (27.03) | |
| No | 58 (77.33) | 54 (72.97) | |
| Alcohol consumption | 0.277 | ||
| Yes | 6 (8) | 10 (13.51) | |
| No | 69 (92) | 64 (86.49) | |
| Valve position | 0.969 | ||
| MVR | 40 (53.33) | 42 (56.75) | |
| AVR | 21 (28) | 20 (27.03) | |
| TVR | 2 (2.67) | 2 (2.70) | |
| BVR | 12 (16) | 10 (13.52) | |
| Hospital stay (mean ± SD) | 8.62 ±2.48 | 9.02 ±2.39 | 0.318 |
Independent t-test
χ2 test
BMI – body mass index, MVR – mitral valve replacement, AVR – aortic valve replacement, TVR – tricuspid valve replacement, BVR – bivalve replacement.
Intergroup comparison of INR levels during 6 months after surgery
| Parameter | Range of INR | Control ( | Intervention ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First follow-up | ITT | 40 (53.33) | 52 (70.27) | 0.033 |
| OTT | 35 (46.7) | 22 (29.73) | ||
| Second follow-up | ITT | 43 (57.33) | 54 (72.97) | 0.045 |
| OTT | 32(42.67) | 20 (27.03) | ||
| Third follow-up | ITT | 42 (56) | 52 (70.27) | 0.071 |
| OTT | 33 (44) | 22 (29.73) | ||
| Fourth follow-up | ITT | 47 (62.67) | 59 (79.73) | 0.022 |
| OTT | 28 (37.33) | 15 (20.3) | ||
| Fifth follow-up | ITT | 51 (68) | 61 (82.43) | 0.041 |
| OTT | 24 (32) | 13 (17.57) | ||
| Sixth follow-up | ITT | 49 (65.33) | 59 (79.73) | 0.049 |
| OTT | 26 (34.67) | 15 (20.27) |
χ2 test; ITT – in therapeutic target, OTT – out of therapeutic target.
Intergroup comparison of the prevalence of bleeding during 6 months after surgery
| Variable | Incidence of bleeding | Control ( | Intervention ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First follow-up | MajH % | 5.33% | 2.70% | 0.414 |
| MinH % | 13.33% | 8.10% | 0.303 | |
| Second follow-up | MajH % | 4% | 1.35% | 0.317 |
| MinH % | 14.6% | 6.75% | 0.119 | |
| Third follow-up | MajH % | 2.66% | 2.70 | 0.989 |
| MinH % | 13.33% | 6.75% | 0.182 | |
| Fourth follow-up | MajH % | 4% | 1.35% | 0.317 |
| MinH % | 12% | 6.75% | 0.273 | |
| Fifth follow-up | MajH % | 2.66% | 0 | 0.157 |
| MinH % | 9.33% | 4.05% | 0.198 | |
| Sixth follow-up | MajH % | 2.66% | 1.35% | 0.568 |
| MinH % | 8% | 4.05% | 0.312 |
χ2 test; MajH – major hemorrhage, MinH – minor hemorrhage.