Objective:To develop a maternal assessment scale integrating both positive (affirmation, optimism, self-confidence) and negative psychological states (fear, anxiety, depression) throughout the entire pregnancy cycle and evaluate its reliability and validity.Methods:In December 2020, the scale items were preliminarily identified through a literature review, forming a 55-item questionnaire for pilot survey and expert interviews. A pilot survey was conducted among registered pregnant women at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University from April to May 2021. The feasibility and reliability of the questionnaire was validated through reliability and validity analysis, and revisions were made based on the feedback. The finalized version comprised 43 items, categorized into four key event dimensions (pregnancy, childbirth, transition to motherhood, and complications) and six psychological state dimensions (affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence). Among these psychological states, affirmation, self-confidence, and optimism represent positive states, while fear, anxiety, and depression reflect negative states. A formal survey was conducted from December 2021 to November 2022. The normality, multicollinearity, reliability, construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of each item were analyzed.Results:(1) General information: A total of 625 participants were involved in the pilot survey. For the formal survey, 8 045 questionnaires were distributed, with 6 273 valid responses (78.0%). Among the valid questionnaires, 5 694 (90.8%) reported positive psychological states and 579 (9.2%) negative states. All of the psychological state dimensions were correlated (all P<0.01), with no multicollinearity detected [variance inflation factor (VIF)<10]. The four key event dimensions were also correlated (all P<0.01), with no multicollinearity (VIF<10). (2) Reliability: The overall Cronbach's α coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.830, and removing any single item resulted in the value remaining>0.6. Cronbach's α coefficient values for affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence were 0.772, 0.724, 0.648, 0.551, 0.257, and 0.740, respectively. The values for the key event dimensions were as follows: 0.722 for pregnancy, 0.554 for childbirth, 0.621 for transition to motherhood, and 0.568 for complications. (3) Model fit: For the psychological states, the Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio ( χ2/df) was 19.979 (>3), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.055 (<0.08). The model of key event dimensions had a χ2/df of 48.557, RMSEA of 0.087, comparative fit index of 0.400 (<0.9), and incremental fit index of 0.400 (<0.9). (4) Convergent and discriminant validity: The average variance extraction (AVE) values for affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence were 0.407, 0.099, 0.188, 0.223, 0.419, and 0.362, with composite reliability (CR) values of 0.822, 0.730, 0.655, 0.584, 0.627, and 0.786, respectively. In the model of key event dimensions, the AVE values for pregnancy, childbirth, transition to motherhood, and complications were 0.167, 0.287, 0.328, and 0.166, with CR values of 0.555, 0.832, 0.746, and 0.633, respectively. Significant correlations were observed between all psychological dimensions except optimism-depression and self-confidence-anxiety pairs (all P<0.05). All four key event dimensions were significantly correlated (all P<0.05). Conclusions:This study preliminarily develops a maternal psychological status assessment scale with satisfactory reliability and validity. This scale can be used to evaluate the comprehensive psychological states of pregnant women during critical pregnancy-related events.

Objective:To develop a maternal assessment scale integrating both positive (affirmation, optimism, self-confidence) and negative psychological states (fear, anxiety, depression) throughout the entire pregnancy cycle and evaluate its reliability and validity.Methods:In December 2020, the scale items were preliminarily identified through a literature review, forming a 55-item questionnaire for pilot survey and expert interviews. A pilot survey was conducted among registered pregnant women at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University from April to May 2021. The feasibility and reliability of the questionnaire was validated through reliability and validity analysis, and revisions were made based on the feedback. The finalized version comprised 43 items, categorized into four key event dimensions (pregnancy, childbirth, transition to motherhood, and complications) and six psychological state dimensions (affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence). Among these psychological states, affirmation, self-confidence, and optimism represent positive states, while fear, anxiety, and depression reflect negative states. A formal survey was conducted from December 2021 to November 2022. The normality, multicollinearity, reliability, construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of each item were analyzed.Results:(1) General information: A total of 625 participants were involved in the pilot survey. For the formal survey, 8 045 questionnaires were distributed, with 6 273 valid responses (78.0%). Among the valid questionnaires, 5 694 (90.8%) reported positive psychological states and 579 (9.2%) negative states. All of the psychological state dimensions were correlated (all P<0.01), with no multicollinearity detected [variance inflation factor (VIF)<10]. The four key event dimensions were also correlated (all P<0.01), with no multicollinearity (VIF<10). (2) Reliability: The overall Cronbach's α coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.830, and removing any single item resulted in the value remaining>0.6. Cronbach's α coefficient values for affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence were 0.772, 0.724, 0.648, 0.551, 0.257, and 0.740, respectively. The values for the key event dimensions were as follows: 0.722 for pregnancy, 0.554 for childbirth, 0.621 for transition to motherhood, and 0.568 for complications. (3) Model fit: For the psychological states, the Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio ( χ2/df) was 19.979 (>3), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.055 (<0.08). The model of key event dimensions had a χ2/df of 48.557, RMSEA of 0.087, comparative fit index of 0.400 (<0.9), and incremental fit index of 0.400 (<0.9). (4) Convergent and discriminant validity: The average variance extraction (AVE) values for affirmation, fear, anxiety, depression, optimism, and self-confidence were 0.407, 0.099, 0.188, 0.223, 0.419, and 0.362, with composite reliability (CR) values of 0.822, 0.730, 0.655, 0.584, 0.627, and 0.786, respectively. In the model of key event dimensions, the AVE values for pregnancy, childbirth, transition to motherhood, and complications were 0.167, 0.287, 0.328, and 0.166, with CR values of 0.555, 0.832, 0.746, and 0.633, respectively. Significant correlations were observed between all psychological dimensions except optimism-depression and self-confidence-anxiety pairs (all P<0.05). All four key event dimensions were significantly correlated (all P<0.05). Conclusions:This study preliminarily develops a maternal psychological status assessment scale with satisfactory reliability and validity. This scale can be used to evaluate the comprehensive psychological states of pregnant women during critical pregnancy-related events.

Gastric cancer is a common tumor of the gastrointestinal tract, and the global trend in morbidity and mortality are not encouraging. Especially in advanced gastric cancer, patient survival outcome is an essential clinical concern and a vital outcome indicator in clinical outcome assessment. This article reviews the definition of clinical outcome assessment and the measurement tools that can be applied in gastric cancer patients, describes the detailed classification of clinical outcome assessment tools, and reviews the current status of the application of clinical outcome assessment in gastric cancer, analyzing the effects and shortcomings of its application, to provide a reference for the clinical staff in choosing the appropriate tools, and assisting in the comprehensive and holistic assessment of clinical outcomes for the promotion of the development of precision medicine.

Gastric cancer is a common tumor of the gastrointestinal tract, and the global trend in morbidity and mortality are not encouraging. Especially in advanced gastric cancer, patient survival outcome is an essential clinical concern and a vital outcome indicator in clinical outcome assessment. This article reviews the definition of clinical outcome assessment and the measurement tools that can be applied in gastric cancer patients, describes the detailed classification of clinical outcome assessment tools, and reviews the current status of the application of clinical outcome assessment in gastric cancer, analyzing the effects and shortcomings of its application, to provide a reference for the clinical staff in choosing the appropriate tools, and assisting in the comprehensive and holistic assessment of clinical outcomes for the promotion of the development of precision medicine.

With the successful application and promotion of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept, its advantages in promoting patient safety and rapid recovery post-operation and enhancing the utilization of medical resources have gradually become evident. Nursing plays a crucial role in the overall operation and management of ERAS. Meanwhile, as a continuously optimized innovative strategy for perioperative management, ERAS drives the innovation of surgical nursing techniques and management models, contributing to the high-quality development of nursing.

With the successful application and promotion of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept, its advantages in promoting patient safety and rapid recovery post-operation and enhancing the utilization of medical resources have gradually become evident. Nursing plays a crucial role in the overall operation and management of ERAS. Meanwhile, as a continuously optimized innovative strategy for perioperative management, ERAS drives the innovation of surgical nursing techniques and management models, contributing to the high-quality development of nursing.

ObjectiveTo systematically review the effects of mind-body exercise on sleep quality, and to sort out the influencing factors of mind-body exercise intervention program. MethodsLiteratures about the effects of mind-body exercise on sleep were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang data from establishment to June 1, 2022. The author, country, publication time, study object, study method, intervention process, measurement tool and outcome index were extracted from the selected literature. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality. ResultsA total of 14 English literatures were included, all of which were randomized controlled trails, and the overall research quality was good. Mind-body exercise methods included Taijiquan, Qigong and Baduanjin. Most of the subjects were old and sick people. Physical exercise intervention with a duration of ten to twelve weeks, a single time of 60 minutes and at least two to three times a week could improve sleep quality to the greatest extent. The health status of the participants was an important factor affecting the effect of the intervention. ConclusionMind-body exercise can improve sleep quality, relieve anxiety and depression, and promote mental health.

Objective:To investigate the effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with music biofeedback on insomnia.Methods:Sixty patients with insomnia who received treatment in Outpatient Department of Seventh People's Hospital of Dongyang from January to August 2021 were included in this study. They were randomly divided into an observation group ( n = 30) and a control group ( n = 30) using the random number table. The control group was given music biofeedback therapy and conventional drug treatment, and the observation group was treated with rTMS based on music biofeedback therapy. The changes in polysomnography sleep structure and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score after 1 month of treatment relative to before treatment were determined in each group. Results:After 1 month of treatment, the total sleep time, sleep efficiency, rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, non-REM sleep phase II (N2%) and non-REM sleep phase III (N3%) in the observation group were (419.87 ± 42.63) minutes, (83.69 ± 13.39)%, (25.27 ± 3.26)%, (53.75 ± 11.36)% and (16.27 ± 2.25)%, respectively, and they were (388.74 ± 40.39) minutes, (76.38 ± 13.17)%, (23.16 ± 2.68)%, (51.62 ± 12.27)%, and (14.36 ± 2.21)%, respectively. There were significant differences in these indices between the two groups ( t = -2.90, -2.13, -2.22, -2.26, -3.31, P = 0.005, 0.037, 0.030, 0.027, 0.002). The sleep latency, actual wake time, numbet of awakenings, non-REM sleep phase I (N1%), and total score of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index in the observation group were (24.16 ± 7.82) minutes, (23.18 ± 6.95) minutes, (1.76 ± 0.28) times, (9.74 ± 2.12)%, (9.17 ± 1.56) minutes, respectively. They were (28.35 ± 7.74) minutes, (28.36 ± 7.21) minutes, (2.25 ± 0.79) times, (11.12 ± 1.17)%, and (10.26 ± 1.42) minutes, respectively in the control group. There were significant differences in these indices between the two groups ( t = 2.09, 2.83, 3.20, 3.12, 2.83, P = 0.041, 0.006, 0.002, 0.003, 0.038). Conclusion:rTMS combined with music biofeedback for the treatment of insomnia can effectively improve sleep quality in patients with insomnia.

Objective:To compare the efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or CABG plus mitral valve plasty (MVP) in patients with coronary heart disease complicated with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency.Methods:The clinical data of 1 050 patients with coronary heart disease complicated with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency who underwent surgical procedures from January 2009 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. There were 733 males and 317 females, aging (63.3±9.0) years (range: 31 to 83 years). Patients were divided into CABG+MVP group and CABG group according to surgical methods, and the two groups of patients were matched for 1∶4 by the propensity score matching method. There were 107 patients in the CABG+MVP group and 406 patients in the CABG group after matching. The t test, Mann-Whitney U test, χ 2 test, Fisher′s exact probability method and repeated measures anova were used to compare the surgical outcomes and overall survival in the two groups. Results:There were no significant differences in perioperative death and postoperative complications between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with CABG group, CABG+MVP group had longer operation time ((5.6±1.2) hours vs. (4.2±1.0) hours, t=11.528, P<0.01), ICU stay( M(IQR))(43.0(47.3) hours vs. 25.0(33.6) hours, Z=2.483, P=0.013), and postoperative hospital stay (8(4) days vs. 7(5) days, Z=2.143, P=0.032). The amount of erythrocyte and platelet used in CABG+MVP group was significantly increased (2.0(6.5) U vs. 0(2.0) U, Z=7.084, P<0.01; 0(0.5) U vs. 0(0) U, Z=5.210, P<0.01). A total of 463 cases (93.9%) were followed up. Median follow-up was 32(31) months (range: 3 to 105 months). There was no significant difference in overall survival and no major adverse cardic and cerebrovascular events survival between CABG group and CABG+MVP group ( P=0.196, P=0.305). Echocardiography showed that there was no significant difference in ejection fraction left ventricular end-diastolic diameter between the two groups ( F=0.322, P=0.571; F=0.681, P=0.410). However, CABG+MVP improved mitral regurgitation better than CABG ( F=160.222, P<0.01). Conclusions:For patients with coronary heart disease with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency, the rates of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events are similar between the two surgeries. Although CABG+MVP improves mitral regurgitation better than CABG, it increases the duration of surgery, ICU stay, postoperative hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirement.

Objective:To compare the efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or CABG plus mitral valve plasty (MVP) in patients with coronary heart disease complicated with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency.Methods:The clinical data of 1 050 patients with coronary heart disease complicated with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency who underwent surgical procedures from January 2009 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. There were 733 males and 317 females, aging (63.3±9.0) years (range: 31 to 83 years). Patients were divided into CABG+MVP group and CABG group according to surgical methods, and the two groups of patients were matched for 1∶4 by the propensity score matching method. There were 107 patients in the CABG+MVP group and 406 patients in the CABG group after matching. The t test, Mann-Whitney U test, χ 2 test, Fisher′s exact probability method and repeated measures anova were used to compare the surgical outcomes and overall survival in the two groups. Results:There were no significant differences in perioperative death and postoperative complications between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with CABG group, CABG+MVP group had longer operation time ((5.6±1.2) hours vs. (4.2±1.0) hours, t=11.528, P<0.01), ICU stay( M(IQR))(43.0(47.3) hours vs. 25.0(33.6) hours, Z=2.483, P=0.013), and postoperative hospital stay (8(4) days vs. 7(5) days, Z=2.143, P=0.032). The amount of erythrocyte and platelet used in CABG+MVP group was significantly increased (2.0(6.5) U vs. 0(2.0) U, Z=7.084, P<0.01; 0(0.5) U vs. 0(0) U, Z=5.210, P<0.01). A total of 463 cases (93.9%) were followed up. Median follow-up was 32(31) months (range: 3 to 105 months). There was no significant difference in overall survival and no major adverse cardic and cerebrovascular events survival between CABG group and CABG+MVP group ( P=0.196, P=0.305). Echocardiography showed that there was no significant difference in ejection fraction left ventricular end-diastolic diameter between the two groups ( F=0.322, P=0.571; F=0.681, P=0.410). However, CABG+MVP improved mitral regurgitation better than CABG ( F=160.222, P<0.01). Conclusions:For patients with coronary heart disease with moderate ischemic mitral insufficiency, the rates of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events are similar between the two surgeries. Although CABG+MVP improves mitral regurgitation better than CABG, it increases the duration of surgery, ICU stay, postoperative hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirement.