| Literature DB >> 35251575 |
Zheng Jin1, Fang Guo1, Yan Li1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of systemic rehabilitation nursing combined with WeChat publicity and education on the early cognitive function and living quality of the patients with cerebral arterial thrombosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35251575 PMCID: PMC8894030 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7396950
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Comparison of the general data (n = 46).
| Observation index | Control group | Study group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 53.84 ± 6.17 | 53.36 ± 6.20 | 0.372 | 0.711 |
| Sex (male/female) | 25/21 | 27/19 | 0.177 | 0.674 |
| Complications | ||||
| Diabetes | 9 (19.57) | 7 (15.22) | 0.303 | 0.582 |
| Hypertension | 28 (60.87) | 29 (63.04) | 0.046 | 0.830 |
| Increased intracranial pressure | 11 (23.91) | 12 (20.09) | 0.058 | 0.810 |
| Brain edema | 20 (43.48) | 22 (47.83) | 0.175 | 0.675 |
| Barther score | 60.11 ± 3.44 | 60.05 ± 3.37 | 0.085 | 0.933 |
| Disease types | ||||
| Vertebral artery stenosis | 9 (19.57) | 8 (17.39) | 0.072 | 0.788 |
| Cerebral arterial spasm | 12 (26.09) | 14 (30.43) | 0.215 | 0.643 |
| Thrombosis | 25 (54.35) | 24 (52.17) | 0.044 | 0.834 |
| Educational level | ||||
| Under junior middle school | 14 (30.43) | 15 (32.61) | 0.050 | 0.822 |
| Middle school | 22 (47.83) | 24 (52.17) | 0.174 | 0.677 |
| Above senior high school | 10 (21.74) | 7 (15.22) | 0.649 | 0.420 |
Figure 1Analysis of the NIHSS score (). The abscissa indicated before nursing and after nursing, and the ordinate indicated the NIHSS score (points). The NIHSS scores in the control group before and after nursing were (26.71 ± 3.26) and (14.86 ± 1.55), respectively. The NIHSS scores in the study group before and after nursing were (26.55 ± 3.31) and (10.32 ± 1.26), respectively. Presented the remarkable difference in the NIHSS score between the two groups after nursing (t = 15.415, P < 0.001).
Analysis of the Fugl-Meyer score ().
| Group |
| Before nursing | After nursing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 46 | 19.04 ± 4.79 | 25.26 ± 6.71 |
| Study group | 46 | 18.88 ± 5.01 | 36.54 ± 6.82 |
|
| 0.157 | 7.996 | |
|
| 0.876 | <0.001 |
∗represented that the difference in the same group before and after nursing was of statistical significance (P < 0.05).
Figure 2Analysis of the MoCA score (). The abscissa indicated before nursing and after nursing, and the ordinate indicated the MoCA score (points). The MoCA scores in the control group before and after nursing were (21.14 ± 3.27) and (24.68 ± 2.15), respectively. The MoCA scores in the study group before and after nursing were (20.96 ± 3.12) and (26.53 ± 2.10), respectively. Presented the prominent difference in the MoCA score between the two groups after nursing (t = 4.175, P < 0.001).
Analysis of the daily living ability [n (%)].
| Group | Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | Excellent and good rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 4 (8.70) | 13 (28.26) | 19 (41.30) | 10 (21.74) | 17 (36.96) |
| Study group | 10 (21.74) | 22 (47.83) | 10 (21.74) | 4 (8.70) | 32 (69.57) |
|
| 9.824 | ||||
|
| 0.002 |
Analysis of SIS ().
| Dimension | Control group | Study group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotion | 60.46 ± 3.91 | 64.72 ± 2.50 | 6.226 | <0.001 |
| Strength | 44.13 ± 2.63 | 51.26 ± 3.25 | 11.567 | <0.001 |
| ADL | 44.03 ± 2.57 | 49.08 ± 3.30 | 8.189 | <0.001 |
| Memory and thinking | 72.50 ± 2.31 | 77.85 ± 2.24 | 11.277 | <0.001 |
| Hand function | 32.85 ± 2.77 | 36.59 ± 2.84 | 6.394 | <0.001 |
| Communication | 82.56 ± 3.42 | 87.05 ± 3.48 | 6.241 | <0.001 |
| Participation | 24.55 ± 2.36 | 30.16 ± 2.74 | 10.522 | <0.001 |
| Total score | 360.12 ± 24.71 | 397.24 ± 30.59 | 6.402 | <0.001 |