Key result
Clinical nursing pathway plus safety care cuts post-intervention anxiety ~31% vs standard care.
Why the study?
The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of safety care and clinical nursing pathways in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention.
Does safety care combined with a clinical nursing pathway reduce anxiety and depression in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention?
RCT (n=100)
Single-blind
Computer-generated random numbers
No
Does safety care combined with a clinical nursing pathway reduce anxiety and depression in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention?
A combined intervention of safety care and a clinical nursing pathway significantly reduces perioperative anxiety and depression, lowers adverse event rates, and improves quality of life in patients undergoing cardiovascular interventions.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports integrating safety care with clinical nursing pathways into cardiovascular intervention care; extends RCT evidence for structured perioperative nursing interventions.
This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of safety care and clinical nursing pathways in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention. This single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial enrolled 100 patients who underwent cardiovascular intervention. Patients were randomly assigned to a control group (receiving standard nursing care) or an experimental group (receiving safety care and clinical nursing pathway interventions in addition to the standard care) ( n = 50 each). The primary outcome measure included anxiety and depression symptoms assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety and Hamilton Depression (HAMA and HAMD) rating scales. Secondary outcome measures included cardiac function recovery time, surgery time, surgical vascular puncture success rate, puncture preparation time, and hospital stay, along with adverse events and complications, quality of life, and nursing satisfaction. In the experimental group, post-intervention HAMA (6.42 ± 2.41) and HAMD (6.32 ± 1.44) scores were significantly lower than those in the control group (9.24 ± 1.52, 8.76 ± 1.59) ( p < 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was lower in the experimental group (12.0%) than in the control group (30.0%) ( p < 0.05). Surgery time (45.60 ± 2.98 min) and puncture preparation time (5.08 ± 1.09 min) were shorter, and the vascular puncture success rate was higher (96.0%) in the experimental group; quality-of-life scores and nursing satisfaction were also higher in the experimental group ( p < 0.05). Safety care and clinical nursing pathways may be effective in reducing anxiety and depression, lowering adverse reactions, shortening operation and puncture preparation times, increasing the success rate of vascular puncture, improving health knowledge, boosting patient satisfaction, and enhancing quality of life in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xi et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Cardiovascular intervention (n=100). Safety care and clinical nursing pathway vs. Standard nursing care was evaluated on Anxiety symptoms assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety (HAMA) rating scale (p=<0.05). Safety care combined with a clinical nursing pathway significantly reduced post-intervention anxiety (HAMA score 6.42 vs 9.24) and depression (HAMD score 6.32 vs 8.76) compared to standard care in patients undergoing cardiovascular intervention.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: