| Literature DB >> 34671405 |
Huixia Xu1, Wenying Yang2, Ying Liu1, Xuejing Mu1, Yang Liu1, Haiping Hu1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the nursing effect of the narrative nursing model on tumor patients with PICC under chemotherapy and the impact on patients' anxiety.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34671405 PMCID: PMC8523226 DOI: 10.1155/2021/3698845
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Comparison and statistics of general information.
| Group | Experimental group ( | Control group ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female, | 50/50 | 54/46 | 0.321 | 0.571 | |
|
| |||||
| Age (years old, | 49.91 ± 4.35 | 50.30 ± 4.50 | 0.623 | 0.534 | |
|
| |||||
| Height (cm, | 169.22 ± 9.86 | 168.76 ± 9.26 | 0.340 | 0.734 | |
|
| |||||
| Weight (kg, | 59.26 ± 5.18 | 60.71 ± 5.33 | 1.951 | 0.053 | |
|
| |||||
| Duration of disease (months, | 3.55 ± 0.54 | 3.62 ± 0.53 | 0.925 | 0.356 | |
|
| |||||
| Smoking history (years, | 6.61 ± 1.33 | 6.57 ± 1.38 | 0.209 | 0.835 | |
|
| |||||
| Drinking history (years, | 9.96 ± 1.38 | 9.88 ± 1.65 | 0.372 | 0.710 | |
|
| |||||
| Hypertension ( | 32 | 35 | 0.202 | 0.653 | |
|
| |||||
| Diabetes ( | 11 | 12 | 0.049 | 0.825 | |
|
| |||||
| Hyperlipidemia ( | 14 | 12 | 0.177 | 0.674 | |
|
| |||||
| Educational level | Primary school and below ( | 17 | 18 | 0.035 | 0.852 |
| Junior high school ( | 35 | 32 | 0.202 | 0.653 | |
| Senior high school and above ( | 48 | 50 | 0.080 | 0.777 | |
|
| |||||
| Registered residence | Rural area ( | 53 | 50 | 0.180 | 0.671 |
| Urban area ( | 47 | 50 | |||
|
| |||||
| Annual household income | Less than 50,000 yuan ( | 12 | 14 | 0.177 | 0.674 |
| 50,000∼100,000 yuan ( | 26 | 23 | 0.243 | 0.622 | |
| Over 100,000 yuan ( | 62 | 63 | 0.021 | 0.884 | |
|
| |||||
| Tumor type | Gastric cancer ( | 37 | 40 | 0.190 | 0.663 |
| Esophageal cancer ( | 15 | 14 | 0.040 | 0.841 | |
| Lung cancer ( | 22 | 19 | 0.76 | 0.599 | |
| Malignant lymphoma ( | 26 | 27 | 0.026 | 0.873 | |
Figure 1Comparison of nursing effective rate, nursing satisfaction, and ARR between the two groups. Note: (a) indicated the nursing effectiveness of the experimental group; among them, there were 88 markedly effective cases, 12 effective cases, and 0 ineffective case, presenting the total effective rate of 100%; (b) indicated the nursing effectiveness of the control group; among them, there were 65 markedly effective cases, 21 effective cases, and 14 ineffective cases, presenting the total effective rate of 86%; and indicated that the result of comparing the nursing effective rate between the two groups was statistically significant (X2 = 15.054, P < 0.001). (c) indicated the ARR of the experimental group; among them, there were 3 cases with redness and swelling of the skin, 6 cases with alopecia, and 4 cases with abdominal distention, presenting the ARR of 13%; (d) indicated the ARR of the control group; among them, there were 6 cases with redness and swelling of the skin, 8 cases with alopecia, and 10 cases with abdominal distention, presenting the ARR of 24%; and indicated that the result of comparing the ARR between the two groups was statistically significant (X2 = 4.013, P=0.045). In (e), the horizontal axis indicated the time points, namely, before intubation (T0), 1 d after intubation (T1), 3 d after intubation (T2), and after extubation (T3), and the vertical axis indicated the investigation result of satisfaction (%).
Figure 2Comparison of GAD-7 scores, SAS scores, SDS scores, QLI scores, and MSSNS scores at T0, T1, T2, and T3 between the two groups.