See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351687124

EFFECTIVENESS OF PRE-PROCEDURAL TEACHING ON PHYSIOLOGICAL

PARAMETERS AMONG PATIENTS UNDERGOING GI ENDOSCOPY

Article · May 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 4

3 authors, including:

Shradha Malla
Dev Bhoomi Institute of Nursing, Dehradun
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Shradha Malla on 19 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available Online at http://www.recentscientific.com
International Journal of
CODEN: IJRSFP (USA)
Recent Scientific
International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Research
Vol. 11, Issue, 10(C), pp. 39961-39963, October, 2020
ISSN: 0976-3031 DOI: 10.24327/IJRSR
Research Article
EFFECTIVENESS OF PRE-PROCEDURAL TEACHING ON PHYSIOLOGICAL
PARAMETERS AMONG PATIENTS UNDERGOING GI ENDOSCOPY
Shradha Malla1, Mrs. Grace M. Singh2, and Mrs. J. ManoRanjini3
Himalayan College of Nursing, SRHU, Jollygrant, Dehradun.

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article History: Health is essential for the human being and to maintain this the individual should follow the healthy
th life style. Due to unhealthy lifestyle individual will have health issues, to address arise problems
Received 12 July, 2020
need to do some medical and diagnostic procedures for the diagnostic and other purposes also for
Received in revised form 23rd
different conditions or health problems of the person. One of the important diagnostic tool for
August,, 2020
examine the upper gastro intestinal tract is endoscopy which is usually done for therapeutic and
Accepted 7th September, 2020
diagnostic purposes. Sometime person have procedural anxiety due to which person’s body system,
Published online 28th October, 2020
physiological parameters (i.e. blood pressure, pulse, respiration and Spo2) vary.
Methodology: Quasi experimental (control group pretest- posttest) design was carried out among
Key Words: 107 (55 in experimental group and 52 in control group) patients undergone GI endoscopy, which
were selected through systematic random sampling. Data was collected by using baseline data tool
Effectiveness, Pre- procedural teaching, (demographic variables) and Physiological parameters recorded from patient’s record
Physiological Parameters, Patients, GI Results: Mostly sample in both the group did not had any previous knowledge regarding endoscopy
endoscopy procedure. There was significant difference between the Post mean scores of physiological
parameters of both the groups.
Conclusion: Pre-procedural teaching was effective in bringing out significant changes in
physiological parameters (i.e. blood pressure, pulse, respiration and Spo2) of patients underwent GI
endoscopy.

Copyright © Shradha Malla et al , 2020, this is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

endoscopy and found that intervention has beneficial effects

INTRODUCTION
Every individual have his or her own individuality related to
his or her physical and psychological condition. When our
wellness illness continuum will alter problems or issues arise
in individual life, to address arise problems need to do some
medical and diagnostic procedures for the diagnostic and other
purposes also for different conditions or health problems of
the person. For this patient has to undergo various scanning
such as X-rays, MRI, endoscopy etc. One of the important
diagnostic tool for examine the upper gastro intestinal tract is
endoscopy.It is estimated that >20 million endoscopies are
performed yearly in the United Sates, out of this 30.6%
endoscopies are upper GI endoscopy. India lacks a centralized
database of these procedures. However, in some hospital on
average there are 3500 endoscopies are carried out yearly, in
which upper GI endoscopy constitutes about 75% of these
procedures. Due to these person will have procedural anxiety
due to which person’s physiological parameters(i.e. blood
pressure, pulse, respiration and Spo2) varyPadam Anita et al.
(2020) did a randomized control trial to assess the effect of
listening to Vedic chants and Indian classical instrumental
music on patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal
on alleviating anxiety levels induced by apprehension of
invasive procedures and can be of therapeutic use. A
significant decrease in Blood Pressure, and SpO2 was also
observed in Group II after listening to Indian Classical
instrumental music.
Problem Statement and Objective
Problem Statement
A study to assess the effectiveness of pre-procedural teaching
on physiological parameters among patients undergoing GI
endoscopy in selected hospital, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.
Objectives
1. To assess the physiological parameters, of patients
undergoing GI endoscopy in experimental and control
group.
2. To develop and implement teaching plan for patients of
experimental group undergoing GI endoscopy.
3. To measure the effectiveness of pre-procedural teaching
on physiological parameters of the patients undergoing
GI endoscopy between experimental and control group.

*Corresponding author: Mrs. Grace M. Singh

Himalayan College of Nursing, SRHU, Jollygrant, Dehradun.
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 11, Issue, 10(C), pp. 39961-39963, October, 2020

MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY Table 2 Assessment of Pre & Post physiological parameters in
Experimental and Control group
In current study Quantitative research approach was used,
Quasi experimental research design (pretest–posttest control Experimental group (n1= 55) Control Group (n2 = 52)
Category
Pre Post Pre Post
group design) was carried out among 107 (55 in experimental B.P Sys. 118.91 ± 11.8 116.73 ± 8.7 121.62 ± 11.5 124.23 ± 9.8
group and 52 in control group) patients undergone GI (mmHg) Dia. 80.18 ± 9.02 79.67 ± 7.3 81.96 ± 9.4 82.77 ± 8.5
endoscopy, which were selected through systematic random Pulse (b/m) 82.36 ± 7.4 80.95 ± 5.3 84.50 ± 8.3 86.35 ± 7.4
sampling. To avoid the biasness data for the control group was Resp. (b/m) 20.36 ± 2.7 19.64 ± 2.4 20.81 ± 2.6 21.31 ± 2.4
Spo2 (%) 98.45 ± 1.4 98.67 ± 1.13 98.25 ± 1.2 98.04 ± 1.4
taken first after that data for experimental group has taken.
Data was collected by using respective tools, baseline data Table 2shows that the post exposure mean was more than the
tool was used for demographic variables, and Physiological pre exposure mean, except Spo2 in control group, and pre
parameters were recorded from Patient’s record, of the study exposure mean was more than the post exposure mean of
participants. In experimental group Pre-procedural teaching physiological parameters except Spo2 in experimental group.
was given to the participants prior to the endoscopy procedure
Table 3 Comparison of Physiological parameters scores of
and on the same day post assessment was done.
experimental group
Analysis and Interpretation (n=55)

Table 1 Frequency and percentage distribution of the base line Blood pressure (mmHg) Pulse Resp.
Value SPO2 (%)
Sys. Dia. (beat/min) (b/m)
data
Pre Exp.
(n = 107) 118.9 ± 11.8 80.2 ± 9.02 82.4 ± 7.4 20.3 ± 2.7 98.5 ± 1.4
Mean + SD
Groups Post Exp.
116.7 ± 8.7 79.7 ± 7.3 80.9 ± 5.4 19.6 ± 2.5 98.7 ± 1.1
Experimental Control Mean + SD
S.no Demographic Variable Mean Diff. 2.2 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.2
(n1 = 55) (n2 = 52)
F (%) F (%) Paired ‘t’
1.4 0.38 1.18 1.9 1.03
Age Value
p value .177 .704 .24 .060 .308
1. 18-29 16 (29.09) 15 (28.85)
30-40 39 (70.91) 37 (71.15) Df54 = 2.00
Gender
2. Male 31 (56.4) 26 (50) Table 4 Comparison of Physiological parameters scores of
Female 24 (43.6) 26 (50) control group
Educational Status (n= 52)
No formal ed. 04 (7.28) 04 (7.69)
Primary 05 (9.09) 09 (17.31) Blood pressure (mmHg) Pulse Resp.
3. Value Spo2 (%)
High school 09 (16.36) 15 (28.85) Sys. Dia. (beat/min) (b/m)
Intermediate 16 (29.09) 10 (19.23) Pre Exp.
121.6 ± 11.5 81.9 ± 9.4 84.5 ± 8.3 20.8 ± 2.6 98.3 ± 1.2
Mean + SD
Graduate or above 21 (38.18) 14 (26.92)
Post Exp.
Occupation 124.2 ± 9.8 82.8 ± 8.5 86.3 ± 7.4 20.8 ± 2.6 98.3 ± 1.2
Mean + SD
Govern. Job 08 (14.6) 12 (23.1) Mean Diff. 2.6 0.9 1.8 0.5 0.26
4. Private Job 29 (52.72) 18 (34.6) Paired ‘t’
Self employed 06 (10.91) 05 (9.6) 3.24* 0.95 2.08* 0.99 0.9
Value
Unemployed 12 (21.81) 17 (32.7) p value .002 .349 .042 .325 .376
Knowledge regarding endoscopy procedure
5. Yes 16 (29.09) 16 (30.8) Df51 = 2.00 Significant *
No 39 (70.91) 36 (69.2)
Diagnosis
Table 4 shows that the pre exposure mean was less than post
Ulcer 12 (21.8) 15 (28.8) exposure mean of physiological parameters in control group,
Indigestion 14 (25.5) 07 (13.5) paired t test result shows that systolic blood pressure & pulse
Constipation 13 (23.6) 06 (11.5) were significant at p=.05, rest of the physiological parameters
6.
Dysphasia 03 (5.5) 09 (17.3) were not significant.
vomiting 06 (10.9) 08 (15.4)
Gastritis 05 (9.1) 07 (13.5) Table 5 Comparison of Pre Physiological parameters scores
Diarrhea 02 (3.6) 0 (0) between experimental and control group
(n= 107)
Table no 1- Illustrates that majority of study participants were
between 30-40 years of age (70.91%) (71.15%). More than Blood pressure (mmHg)
Pulse
Resp. (b/m) Spo2 (%)
half sample in experimental group were male (56.4%) and in Value (beat/min)
Sys. Dia.
control group both are in equal number, Majority were Experimental
graduate and above (38.18%) in experimental group and 118.9 ± 11.8 80.2 ± 9.02 20.3 ± 2.7 20.3 ± 2.7 98.5 ± 1.4
group
education till high school (28.85%) in control group. Majority Control
121.6 ± 11.5 81.9 ± 9.4 84.5 ± 8.3 20.8 ± 2.6 98.3 ± 1.2
group
of participants were having private job (52.72%) (34.6%) and Mean
didn’t had knowledge regarding endoscopy procedure 3 0.5 2.1 0.5 0.2
Difference
(70.91%) (69.2%) and Most of the sample having diagnosis Independent
1.19 0.99 1.40 0.84 0.80
indigestion (25.5%) and ulcer (28.8%) in experimental and ‘t’ Value
p value .23 .16 .08 .201 .211
control group respectively.
Df105 = 1.98

1|Page
Mrs. Grace M. Singh., A Study to Assess the Effectiveness of Pre-Procedural Teaching on Physiological Parameters Among Patients Undergoing Gi Endoscopy

Table 5 shows that there was no statistical significant Nursing Education

difference between the Pre-exposure mean scores of both
Nursing personnel can use the preparatory informatics for
group.
educating patients in the endoscopy unit.
Table 6 Comparison of Post physiological parameters scores
Nursing Administration
between experimental and control group
(n= 107) The nurse administrator should arrange continuing nursing
Blood pressure education for other nursing staff and encourage them to
Pulse Resp.
Value (mmHg)
(beat/min) (b/m)
Spo2 (%) prepare instructional material booklet, videos.
Sys. Dia.
Experimental Nursing Research
116.7 ± 8.7 79.7 ± 7.3 80.9 ± 5.4 19.6 ± 2.5 98.7 ± 1.1
group
The present study can be used as literature for further similar
Control group 124.2 ± 9.8 82.8 ± 8.5 86.3 ± 7.4 21.3 ± 2.4 98.04 ± 1.4 studies related to effect of intervention on physiological
Mean Difference 7.5 3.1 5.4 1.7 0.7 parameters among patients undergoing GI endoscopy.
Independent ‘t’
4.18* 2.02* 4.31* 3.50* 2.56*
Value Recommendation
p value <0.001 .023 <0.001 .0003 .006
Comparison between two different interventions can be done
Df105 = 1.98 Significant *
to check the effectiveness on physiological parameters.
Table 6 shows that calculated values is more than the table
value which means there were statistical significant difference CONCLUSION
between the post mean scores of physiological parameters of The present study conclude that Pre-procedural teaching was
both the groups. effective in bringing out significant changes in physiological
parameters (i.e. blood pressure, pulse, respiration and Spo2) of
DISCUSSION patients underwent GI endoscopy.
The post exposure mean of physiological parameters (Blood
pressure, pulse, and respiration) was reduced except Spo2 in Reference
experimental group. Similar findings were there with study 1. Stewart DE, Abbey SE, Shnek ZM, Irvine J, Grace SL.
Masahiro Sogabe et.al. (2018) their findings suggest that SBP Gender differences in health information needs and
and DBP post distraction was significantly lower than the pre decisional preferences inpatients recovering from an
distraction in interventional groups. There was no significant acuteischemic coronary event. Psychsom Med 2004
difference in SpO2 between pre and post distraction among Jan-Feb; 66(1): 42-8.
the interventional groups. 2. Anita Padam, Neetu Sharma, O. S. K. S. Sastri, Shivani
Strengths Mahajan, Rajesh Sharma, and Deepak Sharma. Effect
of listening to Vedic chants and Indian classical
The current study had following strengths instrumental music on patients undergoing upper
The sample size calculation was done to determine the gastrointestinal endoscopy: A randomized control trial.
appropriate sample size. Indian Journal of Psychiatry; 2020 [cited on 11th July
2020]. Available from:
Limitations http://www.indianjpsychiatry.org/article.asp?issn=0019-
The current study had following limitations 5545;year=2017;volume=59;issue=2;spage=214;epage=218
;aulast=Padam
1. The study was conducted in one setting only 3. Masahiro Sogabe, Toshiya Okahisa, Yuka Adachi,
Feedback from the sample did not taken due to lack Masanori Takehara, Shinichi Hamada, Jun Okazaki et
of time. al. The influence of various distractions prior to upper
Nursing Implications gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective randomized
controlled study. BMC Gastroenterology 2018 [cited on
Nursing Practice 23 oct 2019]; vol 18, 132. Available from:
Nurse should be capable and skilful with the methods to https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-018-0859-y
improve the patient cooperation during the endoscopy and
manage their physiological parameters.

How to cite this article:

Shradha Malla.2020, Effectiveness of Pre-Procedural Teaching on Physiological Parameters Among Patients Undergoing
Gi Endoscopy. Int J Recent Sci Res. 11(10), pp. 39961-39963. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24327/ijrsr.2020.1110.5598

*******

2|Page

View publication stats