Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Feb 26, 2022; 10(6): 1826-1833
Published online Feb 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i6.1826
Published online Feb 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i6.1826
Table 1 Comparison of Piper Fatigue Scale scores of the two groups (mean ± SD, points)
Groups | Time | Behavior | Cognition | Emotion | Feelings | Total PFS scores |
Observation group (n = 52) | Before intervention | 5.15 ± 1.49 | 4.09 ± 1.38 | 5.37 ± 1.48 | 4.19 ± 1.35 | 18.80 ± 2.74 |
After intervention | 2.60 ± 0.821 | 2.44 ± 1.011 | 3.46 ± 1.131 | 2.25 ± 0.771 | 18.55 ± 2.851 | |
Control group (n = 51) | Before intervention | 5.06 ± 1.42 | 4.03 ± 1.24 | 5.34 ± 1.41 | 4.12 ± 1.38 | 10.75 ± 1.76 |
After intervention | 4.63 ± 1.371 | 3.78 ± 1.131 | 4.47 ± 1.261 | 3.03 ± 0.951 | 15.92 ± 2.451 | |
Tafter intervention | - | 9.190 | 6.348 | 4.285 | 4.582 | 12.304 |
Pafter intervention | - | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
Table 2 Comparison of Herth hope Index scores of the two groups (mean ± SD, points)
Groups | Time | Maintain close contact with others | Take positive attitude | Attitudes toward reality and the future | Total HHI scores |
Observation group (n = 52) | Before intervention | 9.14 ± 2.28 | 9.53 ± 2.72 | 10.93 ± 2.43 | 29.61 ± 4.57 |
After intervention | 14.06 ± 1.781 | 14.28 ± 1.891 | 14.52 ± 1.761 | 42.86 ± 3.521 | |
Control group (n = 51) | Before intervention | 9.33 ± 2.64 | 9.48 ± 2.66 | 10.85 ± 3.16 | 29.69 ± 5.24 |
After intervention | 10.67 ± 1.691 | 11.08 ± 1.461 | 12.03 ± 1.391 | 33.78 ± 2.581 | |
Tafter intervention | - | 9.909 | 9.603 | 7.958 | 14.894 |
Pafter intervention | - | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of Hamilton Anxiety Scale and Hamilton Depression Scale scores of the two groups (mean ± SD, points)
Groups | Time | HAMA | HAMD |
Observation group (n = 52) | Before intervention | 20.22 ± 2.55 | 22.07 ± 4.57 |
After intervention | 9.11 ± 3.121 | 9.98 ± 3.211 | |
Control group (n = 51) | Before intervention | 20.06 ± 3.12 | 22.25 ± 4.22 |
After intervention | 13.97 ± 3.321 | 16.88 ± 3.551 | |
Tafter intervention | - | 7.657 | 10.351 |
Pafter intervention | - | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
Table 4 Comparison of Chinese Strategies Used by People to Promote Health scores between the two groups (mean ± SD, points)
Groups | Time | Positive attitude | Self-determination | Self-relief |
Observation group (n = 52) | Before intervention | 39.48 ± 9.19 | 8.33 ± 2.35 | 29.57 ± 6.71 |
After intervention | 52.87 ± 7.721 | 11.29 ± 2.491 | 35.46 ± 6.421 | |
Control group (n = 51) | Before intervention | 40.40 ± 9.54 | 7.82 ± 1.83 | 28.78 ± 5.92 |
After intervention | 47.80 ± 9.181 | 9.04 ± 2.651 | 31.42 ± 5.981 | |
Tafter intervention | - | 3.036 | 4.442 | 3.303 |
Pafter intervention | - | 0.003 | < 0.001 | 0.001 |
- Citation: Lu YY, Lu XM, Shao CY, Wang CC, Xu TT, Zhang BL. Empathetic nursing with mindful cognitive therapy for fatigue, depression, and negative emotions in leukemia patients undergoing long-term chemotherapy. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(6): 1826-1833
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i6/1826.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i6.1826