Hyperbaric oxygen with muscle relaxation for sleep quality anxiety and depression in post-gastric cancer sleep disorders

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

Feature	Control group (n = 48)	Observation group (n = 48)	t/χ2	P value
Age (years)	64.37 ± 4.03	65.48 ± 4.62	-1.254	0.213
Gender			0.169	0.681
Male	26 (54.17)	28 (58.33)
Female	22 (45.83)	20 (41.67)
Educational level			8.000	0.238
Junior high school	12 (25.00)	12 (25.00)
Vocational school or high school	20 (41.67)	24 (50.00)
College degree or above	16 (33.33)	12 (25.00)
Postoperative time (months)	3.21 ± 0.94	3.14 ± 0.96	0.351	0.727

This table compares baseline characteristics (age, gender, education level, postoperative time) between the control and observation groups using independent t-tests or χ² tests. No statistically significant differences were found (all P > 0.05), indicating that the two groups were comparable at baseline.

Table 2 Comparison of sleep quality between the two groups, mean ± SD/n (%)

	PSQI total score (points)		Shortened sleep latency	Improved sleep efficiency
	Before treatment	After treatment
Control group (n = 48)	18.28 ± 1.63	7.35 ± 1.12	28 (58.33)	30 (62.50)
Observation group (n = 48)	18.13 ± 1.75	4.25 ± 0.64	40 (83.33)	42 (87.5)
t/χ2	0.435	16.614	7.261	8.000
P value	0.665	< 0.001	0.007	0.005

This table compares sleep quality indicators (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores, shortened sleep latency, improved sleep efficiency) between the two groups before and after treatment. Continuous data were analyzed using independent samples t-test, and categorical data were analyzed using χ² test. The results showed that after treatment, the observation group had significantly lower Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores, higher rates of shortened sleep latency and improved sleep efficiency than the control group (P < 0.05).

PSQI: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.

Table 3 Comparison of anxiety and depression symptom scores between the two groups, mean ± SD

	SAS score (scores)		SDS score (scores)
	Before treatment	After treatment	Before treatment	After treatment
Control group (n = 48)	57.42 ± 2.30	41.72 ± 2.43	59.50 ± 3.02	43.34 ± 2.22
Observation group (n = 48)	57.68 ± 2.35	31.50 ± 2.29	58.88 ± 3.08	32.48 ± 5.31
t	-0.565	21.188	0.993	13.066
P value	0.573	< 0.001	0.323	< 0.001

This table compares anxiety (Self-Rating Anxiety Scale) and depression (Self-Rating Depression Scale) scores between the two groups before and after treatment using independent samples t-test. The results showed that after treatment, the observation group had significantly lower Self-Rating Anxiety Scale and Self-Rating Depression Scale scores than the control group (both P < 0.001).

SAS: Self-Rating Anxiety Scale; SDS: Self-Rating Depression Scale.

Table 4 Comparison of serum cortisol levels between the two groups, mean ± SD

	Serum cortisol levels (nmol/L)
	Before treatment	After treatment
Control group (n = 48)	475.20 ± 24.15	360.63 ± 20.52
Observation group (n = 48)	483.52 ± 19.91	271.20 ± 25.15
t	-1.842	19.086
P value	0.069	< 0.001

This table compares serum cortisol levels between the two groups before and after treatment using independent samples t-test. The results showed that after treatment, the observation group had significantly lower serum cortisol levels than the control group (P < 0.001).

Table 5 Comparison of adverse reaction occurrences between the two groups, n (%)

	Ear pressure discomfort	Dizziness	Nausea and vomiting	Overall incidence
Control group (n = 48)	3 (6.25)	4 (8.33)	4 (8.33)	11 (22.91)
Observation group (n = 48)	1 (2.08)	1 (2.08)	2 (4.17)	4 (8.33)
t/χ2				3.872
P value				0.049

This table compares the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups using χ² test. The results showed that the total incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group (P = 0.049).