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]陕西西安第四军医大学唐都医院胸腔外科,陕西西安710038
出 处:《临床医学研究与实践》2017年第24期157-159,共3页Clinical Research and Practice
基 金:第四军医大学第二附属医院唐都医院院内基金(No.20160114)
摘 要:目的评价系统性干预对食管癌术后患者生活质量的影响。方法选择我院278例食管癌术后患者,按照护理方法的不同分为对照组(199例)和试验组(79例),对照组患者采用常规护理,试验组在此基础上采用系统性干预。采用QLQ-C30量表、QLQ-OES18量表以及NHP量表第一部分评价该278例患者的生活质量。结果试验组患者的躯体功能和总体健康状况评分明显高于对照组(P<0.05)。试验组患者的失眠、疲劳和呕吐评分明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。试验组患者的睡眠、疼痛、情感、社会联系、身体活动评分明显低于对照组(P<0.01)。结论食管癌术后患者给予系统性干预护理能明显提高患者术后生活质量。Objective To evaluate the systemic intervention on quality of life of patients with esophageal cancer after operation. Methods A total of 278 patients with esophageal cancer after operation were selected and divided into control group (199 cases) and experimental group (79 cases) according to different nursing methods. The patients in the control group were treated with routine care, and the experimental group added systematic intervention. QLQ-C30 scale, QLQ -OES18 scale and NHP scale in the first part were used to evaluate the quality of life of the 278 patients. Results The scores of physical function and overall health status of the patients in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P〈0.05). The scores of insomnia, fatigue and vomiting in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P〈0.05). The scores of sleep, pain, emotion, social contact and physical activity of the patients in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P〈0.01). Conclusion Systematic intervention can significantly improve the quality of life of patients with esophageal cancer after operation.
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:216.73.216.3