急诊护理路径对心肌梗死患者抢救效率及预后的影响

Influence of Emergency Nursing Pathways on Rescue Efficiency and Prognosis of Patients with Myocardial Infarction

目的分析急诊护理路径对于心肌梗死患者抢救效率和预后的影响。方法便利选择2018年10月—2020年6月在该院接受治疗的心肌梗死患者98例。以摸球法分组,A组49例采取急诊护理路径干预,B组49例采取常规护理干预。对比两组患者的抢救效率与预后情况。结果A组的院前急救时间、院内转运时间、出诊反应时间、急诊球囊扩张时间和住院时间均短于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组的急救成功率为97.96%,B组为81.63%;A组的院内复发率为4.08%,B组为20.41%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=7.127、6.078,P<0.05)。分别进行护理后,患者舒张压与收缩压均实现了一定程度地降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组护理后血压显著低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。左心室射血分数LVEF实现了一定程度地提升,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。护理后,A组LVEF高于B组,差异有统计学意义(t=4.523,P=0.001)。患者出院前为其发放调查问卷,A组患者的护理满意度为97.96%,B组为83.67%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.405,P<0.05)。住院期间与随访3个月,A组的并发症率为6.12%,B组为20.41%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.346,P<0.05)。分别进行护理后,两组患者的Barthel指数与生活质量评分均实现了一定程度的提高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。护理后,A组评分高于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论为心肌梗死患者采取急诊护理路径能够提升抢救效率,缩短治疗周期,且能减少院内复发和远期并发症情况,可获得患者的高度满意。

Objective To analyze the effect of emergency nursing pathway on rescue efficiency and prognosis of patients with myocardial infarction.Methods A total of 98 patients with myocardial infarction who were treated in the hospital from October 2018 to June 2020 were selected.Group the touch-ball method,49 cases in group A received emergency nursing pathway intervention,and 49 cases in group B received routine nursing intervention.The rescue efficiency and prognosis of the two groups of patients were compared.Results The pre-hospital emergency time,in-hospital transfer time,outpatient response time,emergency balloon dilation time and hospitalization time of group A were all shorter than those of group B,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).The success rate of first aid was 97.96%in group A and 81.63%in group B;the in-hospital recurrence rate was 4.08%in group A and 20.41%in group B,the difference was statistically significant(χ^(2)=7.127,6.078,P<0.05).After nursing,the diastolic and systolic blood pressure of the patients were reduced to a certain extent,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The blood pressure of the group A after nursing were significantly lower than those of the group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The left ventricular ejection fraction(LVEF)was improved to a certain extent,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After nursing,the(LVEF)in the group A were higher than those in the group B,and the difference was statistically significant(t=4.523,P=0.001).Questionnaires were distributed to patients before discharge.The nursing satisfaction of patients in group A was 97.96%and that in group B was 83.67%,the difference was statistically significant(χ^(2)=4.405,P<0.05).During hospitalization and 3-month follow-up,the complication rate of group A was 6.12%,and that of group B was 20.41%,the difference was statistically significant(χ^(2)=4.346,P<0.05).After nursing,the Barthel index and quality of life scores of the two groups were improved to a certain extent,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After nursing,the scores of the group A were higher than those of the group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion Taking the emergency nursing path for myocardial infarction patients can improve the rescue efficiency,shorten the treatment cycle,and reduce in-hospital recurrence and long-term complications,and can achieve high patient satisfaction.