ArticleBiomedical engineering online2024
Effects of multiple protection model in the operating room on physiological stress and risk events in patients undergoing coronary artery stent implantation.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the impact of multiple protection model in the operating room on patients' physiological stress and risk events after coronary artery stent implantation (CASI).
methodsDuring October 2021 to October 2022, 150 patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) were picked as the research subjects, all of whom underwent CASI. The clinical data were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients were divided into two groups according to different nursing methods, with 75 cases in each group. Patients in the intervention group received multiple protection model intervention in the operating room, and the patients in the control group adopted conventional care model. The patient satisfaction with nursing, postoperative recovery, psychological stress scores, physiological stress indicators, and adverse cardiac risk events were recorded.
resultsPatients in the intervention group had much higher percentage of the patient satisfaction with nursing than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The time to get out of bed and hospital stay was significantly shorter and the 6-min walking distance was markedly longer in the intervention group than the control (P < 0.05). The Hamilton Anxiety (HAMA) scale and Hamilton Depression (HAMD) scale score of patients in two groups were sharply decreased after the intervention (P < 0.05), which were strongly lower in the intervention group than the control (P < 0.001). After the intervention, the heart rate, cortisol and epinephrine of patients were all sensibly elevated in two groups (P < 0.05), which were all memorably lower in the intervention group than the control (P < 0.001). The incidence of adverse cardiac risk events in the intervention group was 5.33%, which was dramatically lower than 16.00% in the control group (P < 0.05).
conclusionThe application of multiple protection model in the operating room on patients undergoing coronary stent implantation promoted postoperative recovery, reduced patients' psychological and physiological stress, maintained blood pressure and other vital signs, reduced the incidence of adverse cardiac risk events, and improved the patient satisfaction with nursing.
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.