Clinical Efficacy Analysis of Fast Rehabilitation Nursing on Pain Mitigation after Lumbar Discectomy and Bone Graft Fusion and Internal Fixation

Abstract

Objective. To investigate clinical efficacy analysis of fast rehabilitation nursing on pain mitigation after lumbar discectomy and bone graft fusion and internal fixation. Methods. A total of 60 patients with lumbar disc herniation who underwent lumbar discectomy and bone graft fusion and internal fixation in our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021 were randomized either into routine group (n = 30) or rehabilitation group (n = 30) via the random number table method. The patients in the routine group were intervened with the routine postoperative nursing mode, and the patients in the rehabilitation group were intervened with the fast rehabilitation nursing mode on the basis of the nursing of the patients in the routine group. The rehabilitation effect, self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS) scores, postoperative pain improvement, and nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results. The postoperative rehabilitation effect of the rehabilitation group was significantly better than that of the routine group ( P < 0.05 ). The fast rehabilitation nursing resulted in a notably lower postoperative SAS and SDS scores versus the routine nursing ( P < 0.001 ). The postoperative pain was significantly mitigated in the rehabilitation group when compared with the routine group ( P < 0.001 ). The fast rehabilitation nursing implemented in the rehabilitation group led to a remarkably higher nursing satisfaction of the patients ( P < 0.001 ). Conclusion. The fast rehabilitation nursing mode intervention for lumbar disc herniation patients undergoing lumbar discectomy and bone graft fusion and internal fixation is a promising approach to improve the postoperative rehabilitation, mitigate postoperative pain, and relieve anxiety, depression, and other negative emotions, with higher clinical nursing satisfaction.

Efficacy and safety of oral traditional Chinese medicine combined with conventional anti-osteoporosis drugs for osteoporosis and fractures: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

“…A total of 40 studies [6–46] reported the effective rate of different treatment regimens, with a total of 3710 patients, including 1861 patients in the observation group and 1849 patients in the control group. Through subgroup meta-analysis, heterogeneity test showed I ² = 0%, indicating no heterogeneity among the studies.…”

“…9 studies [ 7 , 10 , 24 , 48 , 54 , 56 , 64 , 65 , 72 ] reported post-treatment ODI scores of 1344 patients in both groups, 627 patients in the observation group and 627 patients in the control group. After conducting subgroup meta-analysis, the heterogeneity test showed I ² = 95.7%, P < .00001, indicating significant heterogeneity among the studies.…”

“…34 studies [10][11][12][13]15,[17][18][19]21,24,[29][30][31]34,36,37,40,41,[43][44][45]48,50,53,54,56,58,61,[74][75][76][77][78] reported the VAS score after treatment in 2 groups, including a total of 5377 patients with 2713 in the observation group and 2664 in the control group. After conducting subgroup meta-analysis, the heterogeneity test showed I² = 95.7%, P < .00001, indicating significant heterogeneity among the studies.…”

Retracted: Clinical Efficacy Analysis of Fast Rehabilitation Nursing on Pain Mitigation after Lumbar Discectomy and Bone Graft Fusion and Internal Fixation

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”

“…Tis article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. Tis investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process:…”