4.5 Review

Effects of psychological nursing care on anxiety and depression in perioperative patients with lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 101, 期 29, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029914

关键词

anxiety; depression; lung cancer; meta-analysis; psychological nursing care; systematic review

资金

  1. Research Project of Heilongjiang Health Commission [20210404130285]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that psychological nursing care can have positive effects on anxiety relief in perioperative lung cancer patients, showing improvements in anxiety, depression, and length of hospital stay compared to routine nursing care.
Background: This study aimed to investigate the effects of psychological nursing care (PNC) on anxiety relief in perioperative lung cancer (LC) patients. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CNKI, CBM, and Wangfang electronic databases from inception to May 1, 2022. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects and safety of PNC on anxiety relief in perioperative LC patients. Anxiety was the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcomes were depression, length of hospital stay, and the occurrence of adverse events. Results: Six eligible RCTs with 494 patients were included in this study. Compared with routine nursing care, PNC showed better outcomes in terms of anxiety relief (mean difference [MD] = -13.24; random 95% confidence interval (CI), -18.28 to -8.20; P<.001), depression decrease (MD = -11.84; random 95% CI, -18.67 to -5.01; P < .001), and length of hospital stay (MD = -2.6; fixed 95% CI, -3.13 to -2.07; P < .001). No data on adverse events were pooled because only 1 trial reported this outcome. Conclusions: This study showed that PNC may benefit more than routine nursing care for patients with LC in anxiety, depression, and length of hospital stay. High-quality RCTs are needed to validate the current findings in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据