健康教育路径干预在脑垂体瘤患者护理中的应用

Application of Health Education Pathway Intervention in Nursing of Patients with Pituitary Adenoma

目的探讨健康教育路径干预对脑垂体瘤患者疾病不确定感、应对方式、自我护理能力的影响。方法选取2017年2月1日-2019年1月31日某院收治的93例脑垂体瘤患者作为研究对象,将2018年2月1日-2019年1月31日医院收治的接受健康教育路径干预的脑垂体瘤患者48例作为观察组,将2017年2月1日-2018年1月31日医院收治的接受常规健康教育的脑垂体瘤患者45例作为对照组,2组健康教育干预频率均为2次/周,持续至出院日。比较2组干预前后疾病不确定感量表、应对方式问卷、自护能力量表评分的差异。结果出院日,观察组疾病不确定感量表不明确、复发性、信息缺乏、不可预测评分低于对照组[(27.25±6.63)分、(12.63±2.75)分、(14.23±2.45)分、(6.23±1.42)分vs(35.25±4.75)分、(19.74±3.41)分、(17.25±1.63)分、(9.23±1.54)分](t=6.650、11.110、6.950、9.773,P<0.05);观察组面对评分高于对照组[(25.62±4.15)分vs(18.41±3.17)分,t=9.369,P<0.05],屈服、回避低于对照组[(7.12±2.01)分、(10.23±2.74)分vs(9.51±1.76)分、(13.52±3.01)分(t=6.083、5.517,P<0.05);自护技能、自我责任感、自我概念、健康知识评分均高于对照组[(32.25±3.74)分、(26.25±2.79)分、(24.12±2.63)分、(35.25±2.96)分vs(25.41±2.63)分、(21.52±3.23)分、(20.02±3.17)分、(30.41±3.47)分](t=10.139、7.571、6.804、7.251,P<0.05)。结论健康教育路径干预可降低脑垂体瘤患者疾病不确定感,转变其应对方式,提升患者自我护理能力。

Objectives To explore the effect of health education pathway intervention on disease uncertainty, coping styles and self-care ability of patients with pituitary adenoma(PA).Methods From February 1 st, 2017 to January 31 st, 2019, 93 patients with pituitary tumor were selected as the study object, 48 patients with PA who received health education pathway intervention in the hospital between February 1,2018 and January 31,2019 were selected as the observation group. Another 45 patients with PA who received conventional health education in the hospital between February 1 st, 2017 and January 31 st, 2018 were selected as the control group. The frequency of health education intervention in both groups was twice a week till discharge. Scores of uncertainty in illness scale, coping mode questionnaire and self-care agency scale were compared between the two groups before and after intervention.Results On the day of discharge, scores of uncertainty, recurrence, information lack and inscrutability in uncertainty in illness scale of the observation group were lower than those of the control group(27.25±6.63) points,(12.63 ± 2.75) points,(14.23 ± 2.45) points and(6.23 ± 1.42) points vs.(35.25 ± 4.75) points,(19.74±3.41) points,(17.25±1.63) points and(9.23±1.54) points(t=6.650, 11.110, 6.950, 9.773,P<0.05). The facing score of observation group was higher than that of the control group(25.62±4.15) points vs(18.41±3.17) points,t=9.369,P<0.05, while scores of yielding and avoidance were lower than the control group(7.12±2.01) points and(10.23±2.74) points vs.(9.51±1.76) points and(13.52±3.01) points(t=6.083, 5.517,P<0.05). The scores of self-care skills, self-care responsibility, self-concept and health knowledge of the observation group were higher than those of the control group(32.25±3.74) points,(26.25 ± 2.79) points,(24.12 ± 2.63) points and(35.25 ± 2.96) points vs.(25.41 ± 2.63) points,(21.52±3.23) points,(20.02±3.17) points and(30.41±3.47) points(t=10.139, 7.571, 6.804, 7.251,P<0.05).Conclusions Health education pathway intervention could reduce disease uncertainty of patients with PA, change their coping styles, and improve their self-care ability.