| Literature DB >> 35936536 |
Xiaosu Ni1, Xiao-Wen Rui1, Jing Wu1, Wenwen Zhao1, Suyun Jiang1, Rongjie Wang1, Lichun Wang1.
Abstract
Background: To probe into the influence of evidence-based nursing (EBN) on clinical recovery and prognosis of patients with arrhythmia after acute myocardial infarction (AMI).Entities:
Keywords: Acute myocardial infarction; Arrhythmia; Clinical effect; Evidence-based nursing; Prognosis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35936536 PMCID: PMC9288396 DOI: 10.18502/ijph.v51i4.9242
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Public Health ISSN: 2251-6085 Impact factor: 1.479
Comparison of the baseline characteristics between the two groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender(%) | 0.427 | 0.513 | ||
| Male | 72 (60.0) | 67 (55.8) | ||
| Female | 48 (40.0) | 53 (44.2) | ||
| Age (year) | 63.66 ± 4.17 | 64.05 ± 4.18 | 0.727 | 0.468 |
| Course of disease (year) | 2.08 ± 0.64 | 2.07 ± 0.66 | 0.100 | 0.921 |
| NYHS classification (%) | 0.338 | 0.845 | ||
| Class II | 35 (29.2) | 31 (25.8) | ||
| Class III | 56 (46.7) | 59 (49.2) | ||
| Class IV | 29 (24.2) | 30 (25.0) |
Values are mean ± SD or n (%).
Comparison of hospital stay and symptom disappearance time after treatment between the two groups
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 120 | 5.28 ± 1.28 | 32.50 ± 4.03 |
| Study group | 120 | 3.13 ± 1.15 | 22.20 ± 4.07 |
|
| 13.757 | 19.701 | |
|
| 0.000 | 0.000 |
Values are mean ± SD
Comparison of cardiac function between the two groups
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 120 | 47.09 ± 5.34 | 55.62 ± 4.45 |
| Study group | 120 | 52.28 ± 5.25 | 49.71 ± 2.91 |
|
| 7.595 | 12.174 | |
|
| 0.000 | 0.000 |
Values are mean ± SD. LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter
Comparison of psychological status before and after intervention between the two groups
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Before intervention | After intervention | Before intervention | After intervention | ||
| Control group | 120 | 52.62 ± 6.44 | 32.52 ± 5.72[ | 54.81 ± 7.11 | 35.55 ± 6.03[ |
| Study group | 120 | 52.51±6.62 | 31.29 ± 2.87[ | 54.31 ± 5.43 | 33.12 ± 4.55[ |
|
| 0.128 | 2.109 | 0.612 | 3.528 | |
|
| 0.898 | 0.036 | 0.541 | 0.001 | |
Values are mean ± SD.
P<0.05 vs. before intervention. SAS, self-rating anxiety scale; SDS, self-rating depression scale
Comparison of incidence of adverse events after 6-month follow-up between the two groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 120 | 0(0) | 2(1.7) | 4(3.3) | 3(2.5) | 9(7.5) | 4.669 | 0.031 |
| Study group | 120 | 1(0.8) | 0(0) | 1(0.8) | 0(0) | 2(1.7) |