Observational Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Clin Cases. Jan 16, 2024; 12(2): 293-301
Published online Jan 16, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i2.293
Table 1 Comparison of the two groups of general information
Variables
Observation group
Control group
t/χ2
P value
Age (yr)26.15 ± 3.1227.12 ± 3.831.2420.218
Education level (high school and below/junior college or above)6/348/320.3460.556
Mode of delivery (vaginal birth/cesarean section)14/2618/220.8330.361
Newborn gender (male/female) 18/2221/190.4500.502
Feeding method (breast milk/other)21/1920/200.0500.823
Table 2 Comparison of Chinese Perceived Stress Scale scores between the two groups
GroupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)38.23 ± 8.7515.3 5 ± 3.28a
Control group (n = 40)39.25 ± 7.3624.51 ± 5.23a
t0.5649.384
P value0.5740.002
Table 3 Comparison of Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale scores between the two groups
GroupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)22.35 ± 6.369.75 ± 2.51a
Control group (n = 40)21.75 ± 5.7815.38 ± 4.35a
t0.4427.090
P value0.6600.011
Table 4 Comparison of Self-rating Anxiety Scale scores between the two groups
GroupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)56.35 ± 10.5828.75 ± 4.81a
Control group (n = 40)58.03 ± 11.2139.33 ± 7.35a
t0.6897.618
P value0.4930.001
Table 5 Comparison of breastfeeding knowledge mastery scores between the two groups
groupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)32.25 ± 6.5649.85 ± 9.36a
Control group (n = 40)31.68 ± 5.2342.32 ± 7.12a
t0.4304.050
P value0.6690.013
Table 6 Comparison of self-efficacy scores between the two groups
GroupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)58.63 ± 10.25123.25 ± 18.91a
Control group (n = 40)59.12 ± 11.0598.33 ± 15.82a
t0.2066.393
P value0.8380.008
Table 7 Comparison of quality of life scores between the two groups
GroupBefore nursingAfter nursing
Observation group (n = 40)51.23 ± 8.3689.11 ± 11.91a
Control group (n = 40)52.33 ± 9.2172.22 ± 10.31a
t0.5596.781
P value0.5780.011