出 处:《国际医药卫生导报》2023年第14期2026-2031,共6页International Medicine and Health Guidance News
基 金:江苏省中医药科技发展计划项目(YB201946)。
摘 要:目的分析对老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病(chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,COPD)缓解期患者实施中药穴位贴敷联合情志干预的临床效果,探讨其对肺功能恢复的作用。方法选取2019年1月1日至2021年12月31日江阴市中医院老年病科收治的100例老年COPD缓解期患者进行随机对照试验,按随机数字表法分为两组,每组50例。对照组女24例、男26例,年龄60~80(70.22±6.19)岁,实施常规护理干预;观察组女20例、男30例,年龄61~80(70.51±6.35)岁,在对照组基础上实施中药穴位贴敷联合情志干预,主要指标包括临床疗效、肺功能指标变化、心理状态等,次要指标为患者的自我护理能力。统计学方法采用t检验、χ^(2)检验。结果观察组的治疗总有效率高于对照组[96.00%(48/50)比82.00%(41/50)],差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=5.01,P<0.05);干预后,观察组用力肺活量(FVC)、第1s用力呼气容积(FEV1)、第1秒用力呼气容积/用力肺活量(FEV1/FVC)、呼气峰流速值(PEF)均优于对照组[(2.95±0.29)L比(3.35±0.62)L、(2.26±0.31)L比(3.29±0.52)L、(80.11±7.96)%比(65.93±5.64)%、(3.74±1.12)L/s比(6.68±1.89)L/s],差异均有统计学意义(t=4.13、12.03、10.28、9.46,均P<0.05);观察组的焦虑自评量表(SAS)评分、抑郁自评量表(SDS)评分均低于对照组[(38.91±3.66)分比(43.65±3.53)分、(40.33±3.17)分比(45.81±3.29)分],差异均有统计学意义(t=6.59、8.48,均P<0.05);观察组的自我护理能力测定量表(ESCA)评分高于对照组[(154.64±10.37)分比(123.35±10.85)分],差异有统计学意义(t=18.64,P<0.05)。结论中药穴位贴敷与情志干预联合应用,可有效调整老年COPD缓解期患者的不良心理状态,改善肺功能,提高患者的自我护理能力,进一步提高临床治疗效果,具有重要的研究价值。Objective To analyze the clinical effect of acupoint application combined with emotional intervention for elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD)in remission stage,and to explore its effect on the recovery of lung function.Methods One hundred elderly patients with COPD in remission stage treated at Department of Geriatrics,Jiangyin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from January 1,2019 to December 31,2021 were selected for the randomized controlled trial.They were divided into a control group and an observation group by the random number table method,with 50 in each group.There were 26 males and 24 females in the control group;they were 60-80(70.22±6.19)years old.There were 30 males and 20 females in the observation group;they were 61-80(70.51±6.35)years old.The control group took routine nursing intervention;in addition,the observation group took emotional intervention and acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine.The clinical curative effects,pulmonary function indicators,psychological states,and self-care abilities were compared between the two groups.t andχ^(2) tests were applied.Results The total effective rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group[96.00%(48/50)vs.82.00%(41/50)],with a statistical difference(χ^(2)=5.01,P<0.05).After the intervention,the forced vital capacity(FVC),forced expiratory volume in one second(FEV1),FEV1/FVC,and peak expiratory flow(PEF)in the observation group were better than those in the control group[(2.95±0.29)L vs.(3.35±0.62)L,(2.26±0.31)L vs.(3.29±0.52)L,(80.11±7.96)%vs.(65.93±5.64)%,and(3.74±1.12)L/s vs.(6.68±1.89)L/s],with statistical differences(t=4.13,12.03,10.28,and 9.46;all P<0.05);the scores of Self-rating Anxiety Scale(SAS)and Self-rating Depression Scale(SDS)in the observation group were lower than those in the control group[(38.91±3.66)vs.(43.65±3.53)and(40.33±3.17)vs.(45.81±3.29)],with statistical differences(t=6.59 and 8.48;both P<0.05).The score of Self-care Ability Scale for t
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...