Efficacy of comprehensive nursing in stabilizing perioperative hemodynamic indicators and reducing complications in patients under general anesthesia

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of a comprehensive nursing model on perioperative experiences and complications in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 98 patients who underwent general anesthesia at the First Affiliated Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University from August 2022 to March 2024. Patients were divided into a traditional group (TG, n=41) and a comprehensive nursing group (CG, n=57) based on their perioperative nursing model. Surgical data, recovery metrics, stress-related indicators before and after surgery, and perioperative hemodynamic indicators were compared between the two groups. Postoperative cognitive function and complication rates were also assessed.

Results: The CG had a shorter hospital stay compared to the TG (P<0.05). On postoperative day 1, epinephrine and norepinephrine levels in the CG were lower than those in the TG (P<0.05). At T3 and T4, systolic blood pressure in the CG was lower than of the TG (P<0.05), and at T1, diastolic blood pressure was also lower in the CG (P<0.05). At T5, the heart rate in the CG was lower than of the TG (P<0.05). Awakening and extubation times were shorter in the CG than the TG (both P<0.05). On postoperative day 1, Mini-Mental State Examination scores were higher in the CG than the TG (P<0.05), while Visual Analogue Scale scores were lower (P<0.05). The total incidence of perioperative complications was 8.77% (5/57) in the CG, significantly lower than 26.83% (11/41) in the TG (P<0.05).

Conclusion: Comprehensive nursing interventions can effectively reduce perioperative stress, shorten emergence and extubation times, mitigate short-term cognitive decline, and decrease perioperative complications in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

Keywords: General anesthesia surgery; cognitive function; complication; comprehensive nursing model; emergence; perioperative experience.

Figure 1

Flow chart of the study.

Figure 2

Comparison of perioperative stress indicators between the two groups. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences in epinephrine (A) and norepinephrine (B) levels between the two groups (P>0.05). On postoperative day 1, the epinephrine and norepinephrine levels in the CG were lower than those of the TG (P<0.05). * indicates a significant difference between groups. CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group.

Figure 3

Comparison of perioperative systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, and heart rate between the two groups. At T3 and T4, the systolic pressure in the CG was lower than those in the TG (P<0.05) (A). At T1, diastolic pressure in the CG was lower than those in the TG (P<0.05) (B). At T5, the CG had a lower heart rate compared to the TG (P<0.05) (C). * indicates a significant difference between groups. CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group; SP: systolic pressure; DP: diastolic pressure; HR: heart rate.

Figure 4

Comparison of perioperative recovery status between the two groups. The extubation time (A) and awakening time (B) in the CG were shorter than those of the TG (P<0.05). * indicates a significant difference between groups. CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group.

Figure 5

Comparison of preoperative and postoperative cognitive function between the two groups. There were no significant differences in MMSE scores between the two groups preoperatively (A) and on postoperative day 3 (C) (P>0.05). On postoperative day 1 (B), the MMSE scores were higher in the CG compared to the TG (P<0.05). * indicates a significant difference between groups. MMSE: Mini-Mental State Examination; CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group.

Figure 6

Comparison of perioperative pain levels between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the VAS scores at admission between the two groups (P>0.05) (A). However, on postoperative day 1 (B) and day 3 (C), the VAS scores of the CG were lower than those of the TG (P<0.05). * indicates a significant difference between groups. VAS: Visual Analogue Scale; CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group.

Figure 7

Comparison of follow-up complication rates between the two groups. The total incidence of complications was 8.77% (5/57) in the CG, lower than 26.83% (11/41) in the TG (P<0.05). * indicates a significant difference between groups. CG: comprehensive group; TG: traditional group.