ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Analysis of clinical efficacy of comprehensive nursing intervention on elderly patients with hypertension combined with hyperuricemia.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Study protocol for a randomized control trial investigating the effectiveness of a multifaceted mHealth approach on adherence to antihypertensive treatment among patients in Pakistan.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of nursing care intervention for alleviation of anxiety, pain and functional improvement amongst patients undergoing ambulatory surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of the comprehensive nursing intervention on elderly patients with hypertension combined with hyperuricemia. Methods: This was a retrospective study. One hundred elderly patients with hypertension combined with hyperuricemia admitted to the Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from May 2019 to May 2020 were included and randomly divided into two groups. Patients in the control group were treated with conventional nursing intervention, while those in the experimental group were treated with comprehensive nursing intervention based on the therapy in the control group. The improvement of compliance behavior, clinical efficacy, quality of life and satisfaction with hypertension combined with hyperuricemia before and after treatment were compared and analyzed between the two groups. The proportion of patients in both groups who developed gout or renal insufficiency was recorded, and their long-term treatment outcomes were compared and analyzed. Results: After the comprehensive nursing intervention, the number of cases of compliance behaviors in the experimental group was significantly higher than that in the control group(p<0.05). The systolic and diastolic blood pressure and uric acid levels were significantly lower in the experimental group compared to the control group after the intervention(p=0.00). The scores of physical function, psychological function, social function and material life status improved significantly in the experimental group compared to the control group after the intervention(p=0.00). The satisfaction rate of the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group(p=0.02). The proportion of patients in the experimental group who developed gout was significantly lower than that in the control group(p=0.03). Conclusion: Comprehensive nursing intervention plays a vital role in the treatment and prognosis of hypertension combined with hyperuricemia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.