检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]山东省安康医院内科,山东济宁272051 [2]山东省安康医院精神科,山东济宁272051
出 处:《护理学杂志》2012年第21期77-80,共4页
摘 要:目的探讨多学科团队服务模式对社区糖尿病患者的干预效果,为开展社区糖尿病康复管理提供依据。方法将112例临床痊愈出院的糖尿病患者随机分为干预组(59例)和对照组(53例)。干预组患者实施多学科团队服务模式,干预时间为1年;对照组实施自我管理模式。于干预前和干预3、6、9、12个月末,采用自我护理能力评定量表(ESCA)、症状自评量表(SCL-90)、2型糖尿病患者生活质量量表(DMQLS)以及再住院率评定两组效果。结果干预组ESCA、SCL-90、DMQLS量表评分显著优于对照组(均P<0.05),恶化率及再入院率显著低于对照组(P<0.05,P<0.01)。结论对社区糖尿病患者实施多学科团队服务模式护理干预能够稳定患者病情,提高自我管理水平和生活质量,降低再住院率。Objective To explore effects of multidisciplinary team-based intervention on community diabetic patients, and to provide references for rehabilitation management of diabetes in community. Methods Totally, 112 discharged patients with diabetes were di- vided into an intervention group (59 cases) and a control group (53 cases) receiving either multidisciplinary team-based intervention for one year or self-management care. The effect was evaluated by using the Exercise of Self-care Agency scale (ESCA), the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) and the Quality of Life Scale for patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DMQLS) before and 3, 6, 9, 12 months after the intervention. Re-hospitalization rate was compared. Results Compared with the control group, the ESCA and DMQLS scores were significantly higher in the intervention group, and the SCL-90 score was significantly lower in the inter- vention group (P〈0.05 for all) ;deterioration rate and re-hospitalization rate were significantly decreased in the intervention group (P〈0.05, P〈0.01). Conclusion Multidisciplinary team-based service model for community diabetic patients could stabilize their condition, improve self-management level and quality of life, and reduce re-hospitalization.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.145