不同透析方式对尿毒症患者生存质量的影响  

Effects of different dialysis techniques on quality of life in patients with uremia

作　　者：金东华[1] 石永兵[1] 沈华英[1] 施晓松[1] 张田杰[1] 冯胜[1] 李江鹏[1] 华胤[1] 

机构地区：[1]苏州大学附属第二医院血液透析中心,江苏省215004

出　　处：《江苏医药》2013年第19期2286-2288,共3页Jiangsu Medical Journal

基　　金：苏州市科教兴卫青年科技项目(苏卫科20102318)

摘　　要：目的比较不同透析方式对尿毒症患者生存质量的影响。方法尿毒症患者54例,A组18例行血液透析(HD),B组16例行HD联合血液透析滤过(HDF),C组20例行腹膜透析(PD);规律透析1年后,采用简明36项健康状况调查表(SF-36)评估三组患者生存质量。结果 B、C组SF-36总分优于A组[(93.54±18.27)分、(90.26±15.69)分vs.(80.27±10.32)分](P<0.05),且生理综合得分显著优于A组[(56.35±10.76)分、(58.54±9.63)分vs.(42.37±8.23)分](P<0.01)。单项得分比较,B、C组生理职能和躯体疼痛评分显著优于A组(P<0.01),而A、B组活力和精神健康评分优于C组(P<0.05)。结论行HD联合HDF和行PD的尿毒症患者生存质量更好。Objective To study the effects of different dialysis techniques on the quality of life in patients with uremia. Methods Fifty-four patients with uremia were divided into group A F18 cases, treated with hemodialysis （HD）], group B[16 cases, treated with HD combined with hemodiafiltration（HDF）] and group C[20 cases, treated with peritoneal dialysis（PD）]. The qualify of life of three groups were evaluated by short form 36-item health survey（SF-36） after regular dialysis for one year. Results The total SF-36 score in groups of B and C was higher than that in group A E（93.54±18. 27） points and （90.26±15.69） points vs. （80.27±10.32） points] （P〈0.05）. The physiological score in groups of B and C was higher than that in group AF（56.35±10.76） points and （58. 54±9.63） points vs. （42.37 ± 8.23） points] （P%0. 01）, while the scores of role physical and body pain in groups of B and C were higher than those in group A（P〈0. 01）, which the scores of vitality and mental health in groups of A and B were higher than those in group C （P〈0.05）. Conclusion. The life quality of patients with uremia treated with HD＋HDF or PD is better.

关 键 词：血液透析 腹膜透析 SF-36量表 

分 类 号：R459[医药卫生—治疗学]