ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2024
Study on the clinical efficacy, safety and compliance of quality nursing intervention in the treatment of chronic heart failure combined with respiratory tract infections.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety and compliance of quality nursing intervention in the treatment of chronic heart failure combined with respiratory tract infections. Methods: This was a retrospective study. One hundred and twenty patients with chronic heart failure combined with respiratory tract infections were recruited at Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from June 2021 to March 2023 and randomly divided into the control group (n=60) and the experimental group (n=60). Patients in the control group were given regular specialist care on the basis of basic treatment, while those in the experimental group were given a quality care intervention model. The differences in clinical efficacy, improvement time of symptoms after treatment, etc. between the two groups were compared and analyzed. Results: The response rate of the experimental group was 88%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (73%), with a statistically significant difference (P=0.04). The time of fever reduction, cough subsidence and lung rales disappearance in the experimental group were significantly shorter than those of the control group, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). The incidence of nursing related adverse events in the experimental group was 8%, which was lower than that of 23% in the control group, with a statistically significant difference(P=0.03). Conclusion: Quality nursing intervention is an effective treatment for patients with chronic heart failure combined with respiratory infections, boasting a variety of benefits such as reduced nursing risk, improved quality of nursing, and increased patient compliance and satisfaction. It contributes to rapid symptom improvement and significant clinical efficacy.
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.