Managing reflux after tubular gastric esophageal substitution

Table 1 Comparison of reflux incidence between groups before and after nursing care, mean ± SD

Group	n	24-hour reflux frequency		Reflux episodes > 5 minutes
		Before	After	Before	After
Study	50	9.25 ± 1.33	2.13 ± 0.35a	4.83 ± 1.16	0.88 ± 0.17a
Control	50	9.30 ± 1.28	4.52 ± 1.06a	4.78 ± 1.09	2.03 ± 0.44a
t		0.191	15.140	0.221	13.887
P value		0.848	0.000	0.825	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs same group before and after nursing.

Continuous data were compared using independent samples student's t-test.

Table 2 Comparison of reflux symptom scores between groups before and after nursing care, mean ± SD

Group	n	Heartburn		Acid regurgitation		Upper abdominal distension		Upper abdominal pain
		Before	After	Before	After	Before	After	Before	After
Study	50	2.37 ± 0.28	0.91 ± 0.12a	2.53 ± 0.33	0.97 ± 0.21a	2.27 ± 0.22	1.01 ± 0.14a	1.83 ± 0.46	0.86 ± 0.11a
Control	50	2.29 ± 0.31	1.46 ± 0.26a	2.51 ± 0.37	1.69 ± 0.34a	2.30 ± 0.25	1.62 ± 0.21a	1.84 ± 0.48	1.03 ± 0.18a
t		1.352	13.578	0.291	12.742	0.641	17.089	0.110	5.701
P value		0.180	0.001	0.775	0.000	0.524	0.000	0.915	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs same group before and after nursing.

Continuous data were compared using independent samples student's t-test. Interpretation of the Reflux Symptom Scale Score: The total score ranges from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more severe and frequent symptoms. Scores were interpreted as follows: 0, asymptomatic; 1-4 = mild; 5-8 = moderate; 9-12 = severe.

Table 3 Comparison of the nutritional indicators before and after nursing care mean, ± SD

Group	n	Hb (g/L)		ALB (g/L)		PA (mg/L)
		Before	After	Before	After	Before	After
Study	50	57.14 ± 4.37	76.05 ± 5.19a	30.78 ± 3.11	45.12 ± 4.98a	281.25 ± 10.36	332.47 ± 15.06a
Control	50	58.02 ± 4.71	62.19 ± 5.07a	30.92 ± 3.14	38.26 ± 3.73a	282.09 ± 10.24	310.28 ± 14.77a
t		0.971	13.512	0.220	7.801	0.412	6.099
P value		0.335	0.001	0.825	0.000	0.683	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs same group before and after nursing.

Continuous data were compared using independent samples student's t-test.

Hb: Hemoglobin; ALB: Albumin; PA: Prealbumin.

Table 4 Comparison of World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief scores between groups before and after nursing care, mean ± SD

Group	n	Physical health		Psychological health		Social relationships		Environment		Total score
		Before	After	Before	After	Before	After	Before	After	Before	After
Study	50	17.45 ± 2.17	26.71 ± 3.19a	14.78 ± 2.36	23.19 ± 3.28a	10.78 ± 1.15	13.17 ± 1.12a	24.14 ± 2.29	31.21 ± 3.62a	68.15 ± 4.16	94.02 ± 4.39a
Control	50	17.52 ± 2.14	21.45 ± 3.13a	14.83 ± 2.28	19.23 ± 3.11a	10.78 ± 1.15	12.03 ± 1.24a	23.89 ± 2.29	28.36 ± 3.37a	68.08 ± 4.29	81.07 ± 5.23a
t		0.162	8.321	0.110	6.201	0.047	4.823	0.552	4.078	0.082	13.411
P value		0.087	0.000	0.909	0.000	0.118	0.001	0.582	0.000	0.931	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs same group before and after nursing.

Continuous data were compared using independent samples Student's t-test. Interpretation of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief score: The domain and total scores range from zero to 100. Higher scores indicate a better quality of life. Scores are interpreted as: < 60 = poor; 60-79 = moderate; ≥ 80 = good quality of life.

Table 5 Comparison of complication incidence between groups, n (%)

Group	n	Upper respiratory infection	Pleural effusion	Anastomotic leakage	Total cases
Control	50	2 (4.0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	2 (4.0)
Study	50	5 (10.0)	3 (6.0)	1 (2.0)	9 (18.0)
χ²					10.154
P value					0.001

Categorical data were compared using the χ² test (or Fisher's exact test if the expected cell count was < 5).

Table 6 Comparison of nursing satisfaction between the groups, n (%)

Group	n	Very satisfied	Satisfied	Fair	Dissatisfied	Total satisfaction
Control	50	30 (60.0)	17 (34.0)	2 (4.0)	1 (2.0)	47 (94.0)
Study	50	19 (38.0)	20 (40.0)	7 (14.0)	4 (8.0)	39 (78.0)
χ²						9.255
P value						0.010

Categorical data are compared using the χ² test.