Effect of CICARE and humanistic care on resilience and pain after colon polypectomy

Table 1 Comparison of general data between the two groups, mean ± SD/n (%)

Project	Category	Control group (n = 49)	Observation group (n = 49)	t/χ2 value	P value
Age (years)		48.27 ± 5.83	46.86 ± 6.59	1.120	0.265
Body mass index (kg/m2)		23.50 ± 2.4 7	23.15 ± 2.16	0.741	0.461
Gender	Male	27 (55.10)	29 (59.18)	0.167	0.683
	Female	22 (44.90)	20 (40.82)
Education level	Junior high school and below	17 (34.69)	17 (34.69)	0.474	0.789
	High school/vocational school	26 (53.06)	28 (57.14)
	College degree or above	6 (12.25)	4 (8.17)
Polyp types	Adenomatous	23 (46.94)	26 (53.06)	0.367	0.544
	Non-adenomatous	26 (53.06)	23 (46.94)
Polyp site	Transverse colon	18 (36.73)	20 (40.82)	0.179	0.915
	Descending colon	20 (40.82)	19 (38.78)
	Other	11 (22.45)	10 (20.40)
Number of polyps	Single shot	20 (40.82)	23 (46.94)	0.373	0.541
	Frequent	29 (59.18)	26 (53.06)
Polyp diameter (cm)		1.27 ± 0.19	1.30 ± 0.24	-0.699	0.486

Table 2 Comparison of Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale scores between the two groups (n = 49), mean ± SD

Group	Resilience		Strength		Optimism		Total score
	Preoperative	Post-surgery	Preoperative	Post-surgery	Preoperative	Post-surgery	Preoperative	Post-surgery
Control group	29.57 ± 3.20	36.37 ± 3.58	20.90 ± 2.74	24.61 ± 2.98	7.18 ± 1.38	8.80 ± 1.15	64.20 ± 4.54	73.84 ± 3.29
Observation group	29.14 ± 3.52	42.92 ± 3.35	20.12 ± 2.58	26.86 ± 2.92	7.10 ± 1.10	9.63 ± 1.30	64.00 ± 3.63	80.31 ± 4.30
t value	0.630	-9.356	1.443	-3.766	0.323	-3.366	0.246	-8.364
P value	0.530	< 0.001	0.152	< 0.001	0.747	0.001	0.806	< 0.001

After intervention, the effect values (Cohen’s d) were 189 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.41-2.37], 0.76 (95%CI: 0.35-1.17), 0.67 (95%CI: 0.26-1.08), and 1.69 (95%CI: 1.23-2.15), respectively.

Table 3 Comparison of anxiety and depression scores between the two groups (n = 49), mean ± SD

Group	Anxiety status score		Depression score
	Preoperative	Post-surgery	Preoperative	Post-surgery
Control group	11.84 ± 1.38	8.16 ± 0.87	9.16 ± 1.56	8.22 ± 1.30
Observation group	12.31 ± 1.72	7.53 ± 1.12	9.14 ± 1.37	6.55 ± 1.16
t value	-1.491	3.117	0.069	6.748
P value	0.139	0.002	0.945	< 0.001

After intervention, the effect values (Cohen’s d) were 063 (95% confidence interval: 0.23-1.03) and 1.36 (95% confidence interval: 0.92-1.80), respectively.

Table 4 Comparison of pain levels between the two groups, n (%)

Group	Mild	moderate	Severe
Control group	17 (34.69)	27 (55.10)	5 (10.21)
Observation group	29 (59.18)	18 (36.73)	2 (4.09)
z value			-2.479
P value			0.013

The effect size is r = 0.25 (95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.44), indicating a small effect size.

Table 5 Comparison of self-management ability and quality of life scores between the two groups (n = 49), mean ± SD

Group	AHSMSRS		EQ-5D
	Preoperative	Post-surgery	Preoperative	Post-surgery
Control group	137.22 ± 14.21	153.29 ± 8.14	9.10 ± 2.10	6.24 ± 1.38
Observation group	136.90 ± 12.36	168.18 ± 8.41	9.18 ± 1.93	5.53 ± 0.98
t value	0.121	-8.909	-0.200	2.957
P value	0.904	< 0.001	0.842	0.004

After intervention, the effect values (Cohen’s d) were 180 (95% confidence interval: 1.32-2.28) and 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.99), respectively.

Table 6 Comparison of postoperative recovery between the two groups (n = 49), mean ± SD

Group	Time of first bowel movement (day)	First feeding time (day)	Length of hospital stay (day)
Control group	1.68 ± 0.21	0.74 ± 0.09	2.57 ± 0.96
Observation group	1.46 ± 0.34	0.53 ± 0.07	2.06 ± 0.84
t value	3.874	12.851	2.794
P value	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.006

The effect sizes (Cohen’s d) are as follows:0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.37-1.19], 2.60 (95%CI: 2.00-3.20), 0.56 (95%CI: 0.16-0.96).