综合护理干预对冠心病患者生活质量的影响观察

Effect of Comprehensive Nursing Intervention on Quality of Life in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease

目的选择冠心病患者对其落实综合护理措施进行干预,分析这种护理方法对患者生活质量所取得的影响。方法本文调查对象为我院在2017年4月到2018年11月收治的冠心病患者,选择来我院接受治疗的102例患者按照随机方法分为观察组和对照组,平均每组患者51例。对两组患者均采用常规对症治疗方案进行治疗,对照组配合采用常规护理进行护理指导,观察组患者落实综合护理,对两组患者经过不同护理以后的生活质量面对情况进行比较。结果护理以后,观察组的收缩压为(115.6±4.8)mm Hg,对照组为(125.8±6.5)mm Hg,P <0.05,差异存在统计学意义;观察组舒张压为(82.5±2.4)mm Hg,对照组为(88.2±3.1)mm Hg,P <0.05,差异具有统计学意义;观察组总胆固醇为(4.3±1.2)mmol/L,对照组为(5.4±1.1)mmol/L,P <0.05,差异具有统计学意义;观察组满意度为92.16%(47/51),对照组为68.63%(35/51),P <0.05,差异具有统计学意义;比较两组患者护理以后的生活质量,从躯体功能、心理状况、社会功能等4个角度进行评价,观察组比对照组明显更优,P <0.05,差异存在统计学意义。结论为冠心病患者在常规治疗基础之上配合综合护理措施进行指导,可以帮助患者改善患者相关病症,提升患者的满意度,促进患者生活质量的提升,具有推广使用的价值。

Objective To select patients with coronary heart disease to intervene in the implementation of comprehensive nursing measures, and to analyze the impact of this nursing method on patients’ quality of life. Methods The subjects in this study were coronary heart disease patients admitted to our hospital from April 2017 to November 2018. 102 patients who were selected for treatment in our hospital were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with an average of 51 patients in each group. The patients in both groups were treated with conventional symptomatic treatment. The control group was treated with routine nursing care. The patients in the observation group were treated with comprehensive nursing, and the quality of life of the two groups after different nursing treatments was compared. Results After nursing, the systolic blood pressure of the observation group was(115.6±4.8) mm Hg, and that of the control group was(125.8±6.5) mm Hg, P<0.05. The difference was statistically significant. The diastolic blood pressure of the observation group was(82.5±2.4) mm Hg. The group was(88.2±3.1) mm Hg, P<0.05, the difference was statistically significant. The total cholesterol in the observation group was(4.3±1.2) mmol/L, and the control group was(5.4±1.1) mmol/L, P<0.05. Statistically significant;the observation group satisfaction was 92.16%(47/51), the control group was 68.63%(35/51), P<0.05, the difference was statistically significant;the quality of life of the two groups of patients after treatment was compared, The body function, psychological status, and social function were evaluated at four angles. The observation group was significantly better than the control group, P<0.05, and the difference was statistically significant. Conclusion Coronary heart disease patients with comprehensive treatment based on conventional treatment guidance can help patients improve patient-related diseases, improve patient satisfaction, promote the improvement of patients’ quality of life, and have the value of promotion and use.