机构地区:[1]郑州大学第一附属医院肿瘤科,450052 [2]郑州大学第一附属医院手术室,450052
出 处:《中华实验外科杂志》2022年第12期2467-2470,共4页Chinese Journal of Experimental Surgery
摘 要:目的:分析呼吸专项训练辅以放松训练在肺癌患者术后的应用及对呼吸功能的影响。方法:2020年1月至2022年2月郑州大学第一附属医院收治的手术治疗的肺癌患者220例,按照干预方式的不同将患者分为放松训练组108例,联合训练组112例,给予放松实验组患者放松训练,联合训练组给予患者呼吸专项训练辅以放松训练,分析患者睡眠质量、癌因性疲乏、疼痛程度、生活质量及呼吸功能。分析两组患者训练依从性及满意程度。结果:训练后匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(PSQI)、PSF评分有所下降,且与放松训练组比较[(9.53±1.67)、(4.26±0.74)分],联合训练组PSQI、PSF[(5.12±0.22)、(2.67±0.13)分]评分较低,差异有统计学意义(t=27.700、22.390,P<0.05);训练后疼痛程度下降、疼痛知识掌握评分上升,且与放松训练组[(2.54±0.34)、(5.01±0.89)分]比较,联合训练组疼痛程度评分较低,疼痛知识掌握评分上升[(1.01±0.13)、(8.52±1.03)分],差异有统计学意义(t=44.380、27.000,P<0.05);训练后功能型维度评分、症状型维度评分有所上升,且与放松训练组[(72.16±8.94)、(73.18±8.61)分]比较,联合训练组功能型维度评分、症状型维度评分较高[(86.97±10.67)、(87.42±11.61)分],差异有统计学意义(t=11.140、10.300,P<0.05);训练后用力肺活量(FVC)、肺活量(VC)、第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)水平有所上升,且与放松训练组[(1.59±0.32)、(1.62±0.25)、(1.28±0.24)L]比较,联合训练组FVC、VC、FEV1[(2.98±0.51)、(2.57±0.84)、(2.38±0.63)L]水平较高,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=24.110、11.280、16.990,P<0.05);放松训练组满意率低于联合训练组,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=5.955,P<0.05)。结论:给予手术治疗的肺癌患者呼吸专项训练辅以放松训练进行干预,能够改善患者睡眠质量、疼痛程度及睡眠质量,有效提高患者呼吸功能,有较好的干预效果。Objective To analyze the use of breathing specific training supplemented with relaxation training in lung cancer patients postoperatively and the effect on respiratory function.Methods A total of 220 patients with surgically treated lung cancer treated in our hospital from January 2020 to February 2022 were selected,and the patients were divided according to the different modes of intervention into a relaxation training group(108 patients),a combined training group(112 patients),a relaxation training group for patients in the experimental group of relaxation,and a combined training group with patients’respiratory specific training supplemented with relaxation training to analyze patients’sleep quality,cancer induced fatigue,pain level quality of life and respiratory function.The compliance with training and the degree of satisfaction between the two groups were analyzed.Results Pittsburgh sleep quality index(PSQI)and PSF scores decreased after training,and the combined training group had lower PSQI and PSF scores(5.12±0.22,2.67±0.13)compared with the relaxation training group(9.53±1.67,4.26±0.74),the difference was statistical significance(t=27.700,22.390,P<0.05);After training pain extent decreased and pain knowledge mastery scores increased,and compared to the relaxation training group(72.16±8.94,73.18±8.61),the combined training group had lower pain extent scores and increased pain knowledge mastery scores(1.01±0.13,8.52±1.03),the difference was statistical significance(t=44.380,27.000,P<0.05);The scores of functional dimensions,symptomatic dimensions increased after training,compared with the relaxation training group(72.16±8.94,73.18±8.61),those of the combined training group(86.97±10.67,87.42±11.61)were higher,the difference was statistical significance(t=11.140,10.300,P<0.05);forced vital capacity(FVC),vital capacity(VC),and forced expiratory volume in one second(FEV1)levels increased after training,and the combined training group[(2.98±0.51),(2.57±0.84),(2.38±0.63)L]had higher levels of
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...