Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Psychiatry. Apr 19, 2026; 16(4): 115211
Published online Apr 19, 2026. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.115211
Published online Apr 19, 2026. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.115211
Table 1 Comparison of general information between two groups, mean ± SD
| Group | n | Gender (male/female) | Age | Time from onset to treatment | Degree of impaired consciousness (mild/moderate/severe) | Cause (craniocerebral trauma/cerebrovascular accident/other) |
| Observation group | 200 | 136/64 | 54.68 ± 11.25 | 9.57 ± 1.25 | 42/106/52 | 54/118/28 |
| Control group | 200 | 124/76 | 55.17 ± 10.69 | 9.86 ± 2.12 | 36/110/54 | 50/116/34 |
| t/χ2 | 1.582 | 0.447 | 1.666 | 0.573 | 0.752 | |
| P value | 0.208 | 0.655 | 0.096 | 0.751 | 0.687 |
Table 2 Comparison of emergency stay, time to recovery, and hospitalization duration between two groups, mean ± SD
| Group | Cases | Emergency stay (minutes) | Time to recovery (minutes) | ICU hospitalization (days) | General ward hospitalization (days) | Total hospitalization (days) |
| Observation group | 200 | 40.65 ± 3.84 | 215.65 ± 90.24 | 2.36 ± 1.35 | 7.65 ± 1.12 | 10.01 ± 1.23 |
| Control group | 200 | 48.24 ± 4.36 | 232.87 ± 82.63 | 2.67 ± 1.23 | 8.12 ± 1.36 | 10.79 ± 1.17 |
| t/χ2 | 18.475 | 1.990 | 2.401 | 3.773 | 6.498 | |
| P value | 0.000 | 0.047 | 0.017 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Table 3 Comparison of rescue success rates between two groups, n (%)
| Group | Cases | Rescue success | Death |
| Observation group | 200 | 184 (92.50) | 16 (7.50) |
| Control group | 200 | 172 (86.00) | 28 (14.00) |
| t/χ2 | 4.404 | ||
| P value | 0.036 | ||
Table 4 Comparison of prognosis between two groups, n (%)
| Group | Cases | Good recovery | Mild disability | Moderate disability | Severe disability | Vegetative state |
| Observation group | 184 | 103 (55.98) | 42 (22.83) | 20 (10.87) | 11 (5.98) | 8 (4.35) |
| Control group | 172 | 86 (50.00) | 28 (16.28) | 22 (12.79) | 22 (12.79) | 14 (8.14) |
| Z | 3.907 | |||||
| P value | 0.048 | |||||
Table 5 Comparison of medical staff satisfaction between two groups, n (%)
| Group | Cases | Very satisfied | Satisfied | Neutral | Dissatisfied |
| Observation group | 10 | 3 (30.00) | 4 (40.00) | 2 (20.00) | 1 (10.00) |
| Control group | 10 | 8 (80.00) | 1 (10.00) | 1 (10.00) | 0 (0.00) |
| Z | 4.374 | ||||
| P value | 0.036 | ||||
Table 6 Comparison of patient family satisfaction between two groups, n (%)
| Group | Cases | Very satisfied | Satisfied | Neutral | Dissatisfied |
| Observation group | 200 | 56 (28.00) | 102 (51.00) | 18 (9.00) | 24 (12.00) |
| Control group | 200 | 76 (38.00) | 89 (44.50) | 27 (13.50) | 8 (4.00) |
| Z | 4.785 | ||||
| P value | 0.029 | ||||
- Citation: Shen ZS, Xu TL, Zhang YY, Jia YJ, Zhao Q, Li JG. Impact of checklist-based process reengineering on emergency stay duration, rescue success rate, and satisfaction in consciousness-disordered patients. World J Psychiatry 2026; 16(4): 115211
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v16/i4/115211.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v16.i4.115211
