Xie YE, Huang WC, Li YP, Deng JH, Huang JT. Dynamic interaction nursing intervention on functional rehabilitation and self-care ability of patients after aneurysm surgery. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(15): 4827-4835 [PMID: 35801044 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i15.4827]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Wei-Cheng Huang, BM BCh, Chief Nurse, The First Neurological Department, Central People’s Hospital of Huizhou City, No. 41 Eling North Road, Huicheng District, Huizhou 516001, Guangdong Province, China. 623120180@qq.com
Research Domain of This Article
Nursing
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. May 26, 2022; 10(15): 4827-4835 Published online May 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i15.4827
Table 1 Newcastle satisfaction with nursing scale
Serial number
Question
Very dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Generally
Satisfy
Very satisfied
1
Time spent by nurses
1
2
3
4
5
2
Nurse’s ability to work
1
2
3
4
5
3
There is always a nurse by your side when you need it
1
2
3
4
5
4
How well the nurse knows about your care
1
2
3
4
5
5
When you call a nurse, how fast they arrive
1
2
3
4
5
6
The way the nurse treats you makes you feel at home
1
2
3
4
5
7
The amount of information the nurse can give you about illness and treatment
1
2
3
4
5
8
Number of ward visits by nurses
1
2
3
4
5
9
Help provided by nurses
1
2
3
4
5
10
How the nurse explains the problem to you
1
2
3
4
5
11
The extent to which the nurse reassures your relative or friend
1
2
3
4
5
12
Nurses' attitudes towards their own work
1
2
3
4
5
13
The type of information the nurse gives you about illness and treatment
1
2
3
4
5
14
The level of respect the nurse treats you during the nursing process
1
2
3
4
5
15
How nurses listen to your concerns and concerns
1
2
3
4
5
16
The degree of freedom the nurse gives you during your hospital stay, subject to the rules and regulations
1
2
3
4
5
17
How willing the nurse is to respond to your request
1
2
3
4
5
18
How well the nurse protects your privacy
1
2
3
4
5
19
Nurses understand your needs
1
2
3
4
5
Table 2 Activities of daily living scale
Project
Independence
Partially independent or partly assisted
Need great help
Completely dependent
Meal
10
5
0
Bath
5
0
Grooming (washing face, brushing teeth, etc.)
5
0
Dressing
10
5
0
Poop
10
5 (less than 1 time per week out of control)
0 (out of control)
Pee
10
5 (less than 1 time per week out of control)
0 (out of control)
Use the toilet
10
5
0
Bed chair transfer
15
10
5
0
45 meters on the ground
15
10
5
0
Down stairs
10
5
0
Table 3 Comparison of activities of daily living, Simple Intelligent Mental State Scale, and Generic Quality of Life Inventory-74 scores between the two groups before and after intervention (mean ± SD, points)
Time
Groups
Cases
ADL
MMSE
GQOL-74
Before intervention
Study group
43
52.09 ± 6.44
18.03 ± 4.11
53.68 ± 4.34
Control group
43
50.97 ± 7.32
17.59 ± 3.82
55.06 ± 3.98
t value
0.753
0.514
1.537
P value
0.453
0.609
0.128
After intervention
Study group
43
86.12 ± 5.07
26.64 ± 2.66
83.13 ± 5.67
Control group
43
79.81 ± 6.35
24.51 ± 3.00
77.96 ± 6.27
t value
5.092
3.484
4.010
P value
< 0.001
0.001
< 0.001
Table 4 Comparison of self-care ability scale scores between the two groups before and after the intervention (mean ± SD, points)
Time
Groups
Cases
Self-concept
Self-care skills
Self-care knowledge
Self-care responsibility
Before intervention
Study group
43
17.46 ± 4.44
25.22 ± 4.20
22.35 ± 4.74
15.06 ± 3.29
Control group
43
16.89 ± 5.53
24.59 ± 4.46
21.80 ± 3.61
14.83 ± 3.11
t value
0.527
0.674
0.605
0.333
P value
0.600
0.502
0.547
0.740
After intervention
Study group
43
26.01 ± 3.18
37.68 ± 6.05
45.56 ± 5.83
22.01 ± 3.77
Control group
43
22.97 ± 3.46
33.02 ± 5.65
36.81 ± 5.54
17.97 ± 3.56
t value
4.242
3.691
7.134
5.109
P value
< 0.001
< 0.001
< 0.001
< 0.001
Table 5 Comparison of incidence of complications between the two groups, n (%)
Groups
Cases
Re-rupture hemorrhage
Infection
Hydrocephalus
Cerebral vasospasm
Total incidence
Study group
43
0 (0.00)
1 (2.33)
1 (2.33)
0 (0.00)
2 (4.65)
Control group
43
1 (2.33)
2 (4.65)
3 (6.98)
2 (4.65)
8 (18.60)
χ2 value
4.074
P value
0.044
Table 6 Comparison of nursing satisfaction between the two groups, n (%)
Groups
Cases
Very satisfied
General satisfied
Unsatisfied
Total satisfaction
Study group
43
28 (65.12)
13 (30.23)
2 (4.65)
41 (95.35)
Control group
43
21 (48.84)
14 (32.56)
8 (18.60)
35 (81.40)
χ2 value
4.074
P value
0.044
Citation: Xie YE, Huang WC, Li YP, Deng JH, Huang JT. Dynamic interaction nursing intervention on functional rehabilitation and self-care ability of patients after aneurysm surgery. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(15): 4827-4835