Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT06424561

The Influence of Systematic Psychological Intervention on Patients About VSD Drainage Surgery

This study focuses on providing clinical care to patients undergoing VSD drainage surgery for chronic wounds, while also paying attention to the impact of negative emotions such as depression and anxiety, as well as quality of life and social support, on the patients' physical and mental well-being. It observes the influence of psychology on patients.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Conditions

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine

Yiwu, Zhejiang, 322000, China

Location status: Recruiting

Location contact

About this study

The chronic, difficult-to-heal wounds not recovering within the expected timeframe not only impact the quality of life for patients and hinder the recovery of the primary condition but also exacerbate their financial and psychological burdens, further affecting the quality of wound healing. The objective of this study is to employ psychological nursing interventions effectively combined with nursing techniques and communication strategies. By listening to patients' fears, anxieties, and tensions, it significantly alleviates their negative emotions, enhances compliance with medical advice, and predicts postoperative complications to mitigate them. Tailored and empathetic care, along with psychological counseling, is provided to expedite wound healing.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • A mentally healthy, communicative adult. Patients and their families are cooperative, understanding, and supportive of this study.

Adult patients undergoing VSD surgery for chronic wounds.

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients who are unable to effectively cooperate with nursing questionnaires due to auditory or visual impairments, cognitive impairments, or low levels of cultural literacy.

Patients with poor compliance or those who harbor skepticism and hostility towards this research.

Treatment and study plan

Psychological Intervention Group

Behavioral

The intervention group provides psychological education to patients, emphasizing participation in a "Surgery Success" patient group organized by researchers, and collects successful patient cases for promotion. Patients are encouraged to learn from successful cases within the group. Psychological intervention is also provided to family members, as they are the primary caregivers, and guiding their thoughts is crucial. Timely identification of patients with psychological abnormalities is conducted, with psychological consultations if necessary. Targeted measures are taken for patients with psychological abnormalities. Upon discharge, one-on-one consultation and tracking services are provided by designated nurses to alleviate patients' feelings of helplessness and despair, continuing until the patient fully recovers.

Other names: Experimental group

Primary outcomes

  1. Self-rating anxiety scale (SAS)

    Time frame: After 4 weeks of intervention

    The Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) was developed by W.K. Zung in 1971. This scale consists of 20 items reflecting subjective feelings of anxiety, with each item rated on a four-point scale based on the frequency of symptoms. The scoring criteria are as follows: "1" indicates none or very little time; "2" indicates some of the time; "3" indicates a good part of the time; "4" indicates most or all of the time.According to normative results, in China, the standard deviation cutoff for SAS is 53 points. The divisions are as follows:53 to 62 points: Mild anxiety,63 to 72 points: Moderate anxiety,Above 72 points: Severe anxiety.

  2. self-rating depression scale (SDS)

    Time frame: After 4 weeks of intervention

    The Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) was developed by W.K. Zung in 1965. This scale comprises 20 items reflecting subjective feelings of depression, with each item rated on a four-point scale based on the frequency of symptoms. For positively scored items, the ratings are 1, 2, 3, 4 respectively, while for negatively scored items, they are 4, 3, 2, 1. The normal upper limit for the total raw score of SDS is 41 points, with lower scores indicating better states. The standard score is obtained by multiplying the total raw score by 1.25 and taking the integer part. The standard deviation cutoff for SDS is 53 points. The divisions are as follows:53 to 62points:Mild depression,63 to 72 points: Moderate depression,Above 73 points: Severe depression.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Patient satisfaction with hospitalization

    Time frame: After 4 weeks of intervention

    The satisfaction was calculated using our hospital's unified discharge satisfaction questionnaire for inpatients. Each item is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a total of 20 items and a maximum score of 100 points. Scores above 95 are considered satisfied, scores between 90 and 95 are deemed basically satisfied, and scores below 90 indicate dissatisfaction.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine

Other

Registry information

Official study title

The Influence of Systematic Psychological Intervention on Patients Undergoing VSD Drainage Surgery for Chronic Infected Wounds

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
May 22, 2024
Registry last updated
Feb 17, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.