Perspect Nurs Sci.  2015 Oct;12(2):82-93. 10.16952/pns.2015.12.2.82.

Literature Review of Nursing Intervention Studies for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

  • 1Department of Nursing, Gyeongbuk College of Health, Gimcheon, Korea.
  • 2Red-Cross College of Nursing, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea.


This study aimed to provide a systematic review of the evidence from controlled trials regarding nursing intervention studies on patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, a discussion of the methodological problems that limit current research, and suggestions regarding future directions for research.
Using a predefined protocol, 27 electronic databases were searched, studies selected, relevant data extracted, and the methodological quality of the studies assessed.
Twenty-seven studies were found reporting complex, generally heterogeneous interventions. The studies reported positive results, including self-efficacy, knowledge, and self-care. There were 6 randomized controlled trials, 19 quasi-experimental studies, and 2 only research group studies. In addition to support components, the interventions included elements of teaching, counseling, and education. Nursing interventions are still in the developmental and testing phase.
The review demonstrated that a great deal is known about nursing intervention, the impact on a range of outcomes, and methodology. Although some useful evidence was reported for all interventions, further research needs to be carried out.


Review; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Nursing intervention

MeSH Terms

Clinical Trial*
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention*
Self Care


  • Figure 1. Summary of evidence search and screening results.


1.Statistics for morbidity and mortality of the Korean [Internet]. Daejeon: Statistic Korea;2012. Available from:.
2.Antman EM., Selwyn AP., Loscalzo J. Ischemic heart disease. In: Harrison's principles of internal medicine. 18th ed.New York: McGraw-Hill;2012.
3.Odell A., Grip L., Hallberg LR. Restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention: experiences from the patients' perspective. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2006. 5(2):150–7.
4.Rolley JX., Salamonson Y., Dennison CR., Davidson PM. Nursing care practices following a percutaneous coronary intervention: results of a survey of Australian and New Zealand cardiovascular nurses. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2010. 25(1):75–84.
5.Smith SC Jr.Feldman TE., Hirshfeld JW Jr., Jacobs AK., Kern MJ., King SB, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention-summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to Update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006. 47(1):216–35.
6.Fernandez RS., Davidson P., Salamonson Y., Griffiths R., Juer-gens C. The health-related quality of life trajectory in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2007. 27(4):223–6.
7.Chantal JL., Liset VD., Harald TJ., Ron JGP., Cindy P. The effects of Hartcoach, a life style intervention provided by telephone on the reduction of coronary risk factors: a randomised trial. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012. 12(47):1–7.
8.King SB III., Smith SC Jr.., Hirshfeld JW Jr.., Jacobs AK., Morrison DA., Williams DO, et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008. 51(2):172–209.
9.Kushner FG., Hand M., Smith SC Jr.., King SB III., Anderson JL., Antman EM, et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009. 54(23):2205–41.
10.Lins S., Guffey D., VanRiper S., Kline-Rogers E. Decreasing vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions: partnering to improve outcomes. Crit Care Nurse. 2006. 26(6):38–46.
11.Lee EK., Son YJ. Gender differences in cardiac knowledge and symptoms recognition in patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Korean Biol Nurs Sci. 2010. 12(3):166–74.
12.Moser DK., Kimble LP., Alberts MJ., Alonzo A., Croft JB., Dracup K, et al. Reducing delay in seeking treatment by patients with acute coronary syndrome and stroke: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and Stroke Council. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2007. 22(4):326–43.
13.Behar-Horenstein LS., Guin P., Gamble K., Hurlock G., Leclear E., Philipose M, et al. Improving patient care through patient-family education programs. Hosp Top. 2005. 83(1):21–7.
14.Bernstein SJ., Skarupski KA., Grayson CE., Starling MR., Bates ER., Eagle KA. A randomized controlled trial of information-giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care. Health Expect. 1998. 1(1):50–61.
15.Chair SY., Taylor-Piliae RE., Lam G., Chan S. Effect of positioning on back pain after coronary angiography. J Adv Nurs. 2003. 42(5):470–8.
16.Augustin AC., de Quadros AS., Sarmento-Leite RE. Early sheath removal and ambulation in patients submitted to percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomised clinical trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010. 47(8):939–45.
17.Reigle J., Molnar HM., Howell C., Dumont C. Evaluation of inpatient interventional cardiology. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2006. 18(4):523–9.
18.Leeper B. Nursing outcomes: percutaneous coronary interventions. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004. 19(5):346–53.
19.Glasgow RE., Vogt TM., Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999. 89(9):1322–7.
20.Whittemore R., Grey M. The systematic development of nursing interventions. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2002. 34(2):115–20.
21.Burns N., Grove SK. The practice of nursing research: conduct, critique and utilization. 5th ed.Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co;2005.
22.Aiken LH., Clarke SP., Sloane DM. Hospital staffing, organization, and quality of care: cross-national finding. Nurs Outlook. 2002. 50(5):187–94.
23.Mass ML., Johnson M., Moorhead S. Classifying nursing-sensitive patient outcomes. Image J Nurs Sch. 1996. 28(4):295–301.
24.Whitman GR., Davidson LJ., Rudy EB., Wolf GA. Developing a multi-institutional nursing report card. J Nurs Adm. 2001. 31(2):78–84.
25.Hart S., Bergquist S., Gajewski B., Dunton N. Reliability testing of the national database of nursing quality indicators pressure ulcer indicator. J Nurs Care Qual. 2006. 21(3):256–65.
26.Dumont CJ. Blood pressure and risks of vascular complications after percutaneous coronary intervention. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2007. 26(3):121–7.
27.De Bleser L., Depreitere R., De Waele K., Vanhaecht K., Vlayen J., Sermeus W. Defining pathways. J Nurs Manag. 2006. 14(7):553–63.
28.Hung DY., Rundall TG., Tallia AF., Cohen DJ., Halpin HA., Crabtree BF. Rethinking prevention in primary care: applying the chronic care model to address health risk behaviors. Milbank Q. 2007. 85(1):69–91.
29.Peterson ED., Bynum DZ., Roe MT. Association of evidence-based care processes and outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes: performance matters. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2008. 23(1):50–5.
Full Text Links
  • PNS
export Copy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2023 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: