Retrospective analysis of nursing interventions using artificial intelligence multimodal emotion recognition for perioperative depression in head and neck tumors

Table 1 Comparison of baseline data and preoperative emotional parameters between the two groups of patients, n (%)

Project	Conventional care group (n = 27)	Artificial intelligence personalized care group (n = 33)	t/χ2 value	P value
Age (years)	58.48 ± 9.73	57.94 ± 10.18	0.208	0.836
Male	17 (62.96)	22 (66.67)	0.090	0.765
History of smoking	16 (59.26)	21 (63.64)	0.120	0.729
Oral cancer	10 (37.04)	12 (36.36)	0.003	0.957
Laryngeal cancer	8 (29.63)	10 (30.30)	0.003	0.955
Oropharyngeal/hypopharyngeal cancer	9 (33.33)	11 (33.33)	0.000	1.000
ASA class II	20 (74.07)	25 (75.76)	0.022	0.881
TNM stage III-IV	21 (77.78)	27 (81.82)	0.152	0.697
Total laryngectomy	8 (29.63)	10 (30.30)	0.003	0.955
HAMD score (points)	24.93 ± 4.11	24.12 ± 4.36	0.734	0.466
Comprehensive Emotional Score (point)	37.84 ± 10.22	38.67 ± 9.85	-0.319	0.751
Baseline EMI	0.39 ± 0.11	0.37 ± 0.10	0.737	0.464
Baseline proportion of positive emotions (%)	28.10 ± 9.23	29.22 ± 8.95	-0.476	0.636
Facial modal quality score	0.85 ± 0.07	0.86 ± 0.07	-0.551	0.584

ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; TNM: Tumor-node-metastasis; HAMD: Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; EMI: Emotional Mood Index.

Table 2 Correlation analysis of artificial intelligence multimodal emotion parameters and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score

Variable	R value	P value
Comprehensive emotional score (point)	-0.624	< 0.001
Proportion of positive emotions	-0.592	< 0.001
EMI	0.671	< 0.001
ERS	-0.561	< 0.001
Facial modal quality score	-0.208	0.112

EMI: Emotional Mood Index; ERS: Emotional Recovery Score.

Table 3 Comparison of perioperative emotional indicators between the two groups of patients, mean ± SD

Indicator	Time point	Conventional care group (n = 27)	Artificial intelligence personalized care group (n = 33)	F inter group/time/interaction value	P inter group/time/interaction value
HAMD score (points)	Before surgery 1 day	24.93 ± 4.11	24.12 ± 4.36	0.133/69.956/3.784	0.716/< 0.001/0.026
	After surgery 3 days	22.70 ± 3.86	20.49 ± 3.52a
	After surgery 7 days	20.48 ± 3.51	16.88 ± 3.13a
Comprehensive emotional score (point)	Before surgery 1 day	37.84 ± 10.22	38.67 ± 9.85	4.024/101.392/7.057	0.047/< 0.001/0.001
	After surgery 3 days	42.59 ± 8.94	48.88 ± 8.21a
	After surgery 7 days	48.74 ± 8.31	57.46 ± 7.68a
EMI	Before surgery 1 day	0.39 ± 0.11	0.37 ± 0.10	0.832/74.273/5.907	0.364/< 0.001/0.004
	After surgery 3 days	0.35 ± 0.10	0.29 ± 0.08a
	After surgery 7 days	0.30 ± 0.08	0.22 ± 0.071
Proportion of positive emotions (%)	Before surgery 1 day	28.10 ± 9.23	29.22 ± 8.95	5.385/95.170/8.509	0.022/< 0.001/< 0.001
	After surgery 3 days	32.67 ± 8.50	39.39 ± 8.27a
	After surgery 7 days	38.07 ± 7.96	47.97 ± 7.51a

^aP < 0.05 between the routine care group vs artificial intelligencepersonalized care group at the same time point.

HAMD: Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; EMI: Emotional Mood Index.

Table 4 Comparison of postoperative clinical outcomes between the two groups of patients, n (%)/mean ± SD

Indicator	Conventional care group (n = 27)	Artificial intelligence personalized care group (n = 33)	t/χ2 value	P value
Postoperative hospital stay (days)	14.48 ± 4.13	11.76 ± 3.36	2.814	0.007
Incidence of complications	11 (40.74)	5 (15.15)	4.972	0.026
SF-36 PCS score	56.41 ± 8.26	63.52 ± 7.84	-3.412	0.001
SF-36 MCS score	57.70 ± 7.92	66.27 ± 7.20	-4.385	< 0.001
ERS (minutes/day)	1.51 ± 0.44	2.39 ± 0.52	-6.981	< 0.001

SF-36: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey; MCS: Mental Component Summary; ERS: Emotional Recovery Score.

Table 5 Comparison of negative emotion recognition and nursing response efficiency between the two groups, n (%)

Indicator	Conventional care group (n = 27)	Artificial intelligence personalized care group (n = 33)	t/χ2 value	P value
Negative emotion recognition rate	18 (66.67)	31 (93.94)	7.377	0.007
First identification time (hours)	18.70 ± 6.32	6.82 ± 2.95	9.607	< 0.001
Nursing response time (minutes)	42.19 ± 11.73	17.67 ± 5.42	10.707	< 0.001
Intervention matching rate	16 (59.26)	30 (90.91)	8.315	0.004
Emotional improvement rate within 24 hours	14 (51.85)	27 (81.82)	6.163	0.013

Table 6 Comparison of recognition performance between artificial intelligence multimodal models and single-modal models

Model	AUC (95%CI)	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)	Youden index
Facial modality	0.782 (0.663-0.901)	72.727	74.194	0.469
Speech modality	0.741 (0.616-0.867)	68.182	70.968	0.391
Text modality	0.756 (0.634-0.878)	70.455	72.581	0.430
Multimodal fusion	0.894 (0.812-0.975)	86.364	83.871	0.702

AUC: Area under the curve; CI: Confidence interval.