BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Retrospective Study
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Oct 27, 2026; 18(10): 120648
Published online Oct 27, 2026. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.120648
Table 1 Baseline data of patients under two management models, n (%)/mean ± SD
Categories
Regular group (n = 45)
Intervention group (n = 47)
t/χ2 value
P value
Sex0.4730.492
Male29 (64.44)27 (57.45)
Female16 (35.56)20 (42.55)
Average age (years)61.87 ± 11.6760.00 ± 10.860.7960.428
Body mass index (kg/m2)22.09 ± 2.5722.38 ± 2.110.5930.555
Educational level0.4160.812
Junior high school or below23 (51.11)25 (53.19)
Senior high school14 (31.11)12 (25.53)
Graduate or above8 (17.78)10 (21.82)
Lesion diameter (mm)10.62 ± 1.9610.48 ± 2.040.5450.587
Table 2 Impacts of two management models on patient safety, n (%)
Categories
Regular group (n = 45)
Intervention group (n = 47)
χ2 value
P value
Abdominal pain3 (6.67)0 (0.00)
Abdominal distension2 (4.44)1 (2.13)
Bleeding4 (8.89)2 (4.26)
Infection2 (4.44)1 (2.13)
Total occurrence11 (24.44)4 (8.51)4.2770.039
Table 3 Influence of two management models on patients’ nursing satisfaction, n (%)
Categories
Regular group (n = 45)
Intervention group (n = 47)
χ2 value
P value
Very satisfied14 (31.11)23 (48.94)
Relatively satisfied12 (26.67)15 (31.91)
Satisfied8 (17.78)7 (14.89)
Uncertain0 (0.00)0 (0.00)
Dissatisfied11 (24.44)2 (4.26)
Nursing satisfaction34 (75.56)45 (95.74)7.7230.006


Write to the Help Desk