Application of information-motivation-behavioral skill model evidence-based nursing combined with cognitive behavioral intervention in children after brain tumor surgery

Table 1 General data comparison between both patient groups, n (%)/mean ± SD

Project	Control group (n = 40)	Observation group (n = 42)	t/ χ2	P value
Age (years)	7.83 ± 1.95	7.93 ± 2.09	0.232	0.817
Gender			0.069	0.793
Male	24 (60.00)	24 (57.14)
Female	16 (40.00)	18 (42.86)
ASA classification			0.205	0.650
Level I	18 (45.00)	21 (50.00)
Level II	22 (55.00)	21 (50.00)
Pathological category			0.002	0.965
Benign	24 (60.00)	25 (59.52)
Malignant	16 (40.00)	17 (40.48)
Pathological type			0.747	0.945
Astrocytoma	16 (40.00)	17 (40.48)
Ependymal retention	10 (25.00)	12 (28.57)
Embryonal tumors	9 (22.50)	7 (16.67)
Craniopharyngioma	4 (10.00)	4 (9.52)
Other	1 (2.50)	2 (4.76)

ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists.

Table 2 General data comparison of both patient groups’ primary caregivers, n (%)/mean ± SD

Project	Control group (n = 40)	Observation group (n = 42)	t/ χ2	P value
Age (years)	37.50 ± 5.80	37.93 ± 6.03	0.328	0.744
Mainly caring for parents			0.574	0.449
Mother	34 (85.00)	38 (90.48)
Other	6 (15.00)	4 (9.52)
Educational level			0.496	0.481
High school and above	33 (82.50)	32 (76.19)
Junior high school and below	7 (17.50)	10 (23.81)
Monthly household income (yuan)			0.005	0.946
> 4000	26 (65.00)	27 (64.29)
≤ 4000	14 (35.00)	15 (35.71)

Table 3 Recovery of brain function in comparison to both child groups, mean ± SD

Group	n	WeeFIM rating		Gesell score
		Before intervention	After intervention	Before intervention	After intervention
Control group	40	38.48 ± 5.48	54.08 ± 6.27a	52.30 ± 5.49	63.23 ± 5.03a
Observation group	42	37.48 ± 5.16	62.31 ± 7.57a	52.05 ± 5.83	70.24 ± 7.49a
t		0.850	5.351	0.202	4.999
P value		0.398	< 0.001	0.841	< 0.001

^aP < 0.05, compared with before intervention.

WeeFIM: Functional Independence Measure for Children.

Table 4 Quality of life comparison between both child groups, mean ± SD

Group	n	Physiological functions		Emotional function		Social features		Role function
		Before intervention	After intervention	Before intervention	After intervention	Before intervention	After intervention	Before intervention	After intervention
Control group	40	68.40 ± 9.60	82.68 ± 8.24b	65.23 ± 9.42	71.38 ± 6.26b	61.15 ± 9.09	81.15 ± 9.14b	61.95 ± 9.39	77.95 ± 10.08b
Observation group	42	68.69 ± 10.18	88.45 ± 6.25b	65.67 ± 10.36	81.17 ± 9.19b	61.41 ± 9.46	85.86 ± 7.86b	62.12 ± 9.42	83.69 ± 8.43b
t		0.133	3.588	0.202	5.661	0.124	2.504	0.081	2.802
P value		0.895	0.001	0.841	< 0.001	0.901	0.014	0.935	0.006

^bP < 0.05, compared with before intervention.

Table 5 Knowledge of diseases compared between both parent groups, n (%)

Group	n	Master	Basic mastery	Not mastered	Overall situation
Control group	40	16 (40.00)	16 (40.00)	8 (20.00)	32 (80.00)
Observation group	42	34 (80.95)	7 (16.67)	1 (2.38)	41 (97.62)
χ2					6.509
P value					0.011c

^cP < 0.05, compared with before intervention.

Table 6 Parent satisfaction in both groups is compared, n (%)

Group	n	Very satisfied	Generally satisfied	Dissatisfied	Satisfaction rate
Control group	40	14 (35.00)	17 (42.50)	9 (22.50)	31 (77.50)
Observation group	42	18 (42.86)	23 (54.76)	1 (2.38)	41 (97.62)
χ2					7.745
P value					0.005d

^dP < 0.05, compared with before intervention.