Investigating the Relevance of Nursing Caring Interventions Delivered to Patients with Coronary Artery Disease at a Teaching Hospital in China: A Retrospective Study

Abstract

Objective: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Previous systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials concluded that nursing caring interventions (NCIs) are beneficial for coronary artery patients. However, most of those interventions were conducted in outpatient or home-based settings or through the telephone. Due to its multiple benefits, the authors recommended the application of such interventions to hospitalized coronary artery patients. Currently, little is known on the status of application of such evidence-based interventions in the actual clinical setting for hospitalized coronary artery patients. Similar studies conducted in China were also inadequate. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the kinds of NCIs delivered to hospitalized coronary artery patients and their consistent relationship with risk factors of CAD found in the clinical records of patients. Results of this study were expected to alert nurses to consider such risk factors when caring for coronary artery patients as well as appraising their caring efforts in improving the patient’s wellbeing for the reduction of morbidity and mortality from a CAD sequel. This report also disseminates some cardiovascular knowledge and health tips to the readers. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective design using clinical case notes was employed; the study was undertaken in coronary care wards at the teaching hospital in China from November 2017 to September 2018. A total of 300 coronary artery case notes were randomly selected from 700 eligible cardiovascular patients files by using a simple random technique of simple random numbers through Microsoft office excel sheet. Chi-square (χ2) test and multivariate logistic regression analysis for adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) within its range were used to compare the relationship among independent (patient's demographic and clinical risk factors of CAD) and dependent variables (NCIs implemented to such patients). Results: A total of 300 coronary artery patients’ case notes were audited with a mean age of 63±11.2 years. Of these 175 (58.3%) were males, 126 (42%) were smokers and 224 (74.7%) were hypertensive. NCIs such as “administer coronary artery medication and their instructions” was mostly delivered to 291 (97%) patients. The delivery of three out of eight gathered NCIs were significantly influenced by three or all of these CAD risk factors (age, smoking, hypertension, and diabetes) (p < 0.05 and/or < 0.01) with an adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) within their significant ranges. Patients with diabetes mellitus were five times more likely to influence the delivery of “administer medication and their instructions” than the rest of patients with coronary artery risk factors (p < 0.01; AOR (95% CI) 5.02(2.059-7.207). Conclusion: This study reveals that nurses delivered beneficial evidence-based interventions to patients with CAD. The interventions were significantly consistent with age as an unmodifiable risk factor and smoking, hypertension, and diabetes as modifiable risk factors of CAD. However, the management of stress in these patients was low; and since stress may trigger CAD, it should be assessed and managed appropriately.