期刊文献+

人工心脏起搏器对高龄患者生活质量及预后的影响 被引量:5

Effect of pacemakers on the quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:对比安装单心室或双腔心脏起搏器对高龄患者术后生活质量及预后的影响。方法:136例大于70岁的高龄患者安装起搏器术后(3.5±2.1)年,观察生活质量分级、运动能力、生存率、心功能等指标。结果:两组起搏器术后生存率无明显差异(93.7%与94.2%,P>0.05)。运动总时间、距离、生活质量均明显改善,但两组对比无明显差异。起搏器综合征仅发生于单心室起搏者(27.1%)。单心室起搏者术后左房内径(3.82±0.21)大于双腔起搏者(3.38±0.41),心功能两组间无差别(P<0.05)。结论:无论是单心室起搏还是双腔起搏术后均能满足高龄患者的基本生活需求、改善生活质量,双腔起搏更能满足老年患者心脏生理特性。 AIM:To contrast the effect of either ven tricular pacemaker or dual-chamber pacemaker on the quality of life and c linical outcomes in elderly patient s.METHODS :The survival rate,the level of quality of life,movement abil-ity,heart function etc.were observ ed in 136patients 70years of age or older after(3.5±2.1)years of the pacemaker implantation.RESULTS:The survival rate was no difference betw een the two pacemakers(93.7%vs94.2%,P>0.05).Quality of life,daily maximum move ment time and distance were improved significant ly after pacemaker implantation,but no different between the two pacemakers.The pacemaker syndrome only was found in the patients implanted vent ricular pacemaker.Left atrium diam eter is larger in the patients implanted v entricular pacemaker than the patie nts implanted dual-chamber pacemaker(3.82±0.21vs 3.38±0.41,P<0.05).Heart functions were no different i n the two pacemakers.CON-CLUSION:The implantation of a permanent pacemaker either ventricular pacemaker or dual-chamber pacemaker all improves health-related quality of life,meet with requirement of life i n the elderly patients.Dual-chamber pacemaker is believed to be more physiologic.
出处 《中国临床康复》 CSCD 2003年第3期386-387,共2页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation
关键词 人工起搏器 生活质量 预后 pacemaker,artificial quality of l ife prognosis
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献9

共引文献24

同被引文献31

  • 1范洁,丁立群,周乐今,邓旭,谢红,苗云波,张云梅.房室结消融及起搏器治疗改善心房颤动患者心功能和生活质量的研究[J].中国心脏起搏与心电生理杂志,2004,18(4):254-256. 被引量:10
  • 2蔡杏林,黄定九,章隆泉.体动感知频率应答型起搏器的频率应答及运动耐量观察[J].心脏起搏与心电生理杂志,1994,8(2):81-82. 被引量:2
  • 3赵阳,汤宝鹏.频率适应性起搏器对老年病态窦房结综合征患者生活质量影响的评价[J].心血管病学进展,2006,27(4):426-429. 被引量:4
  • 4Connolly SJ,Kerr CR,Gent M,et al. Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the risk of stroke and death due to cardiovascular causes. N Engl J Med, 2000,342: 1385- 1391.
  • 5黄敬亨.健康教育[M].上海:上海医科大学出版社,1994:85.
  • 6湖南医科大学附属湘雅医院.病人健康指导[M].长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,1998:333.
  • 7[1]Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey(SF-36) .I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30:473 - 83
  • 8[2]Linde C. Quality of life in pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillor recipients. PACE 2000; 23:931 - 3
  • 9[3]Gervasio AL, John O, Bruce SS, et al. Quality of life and clinical outcomes in eldly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dual-chamber pacing. N Eng J Med 1998; 338(16): 1097 - 104
  • 10[4]Dure F, Buchi S, Klaghofer R, et al. How different from pacemaker patients are recipients of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators with respect to psychosocial adaptation, affective disorders, and quality of life. Heart 2001; 85:375 - 9

引证文献5

二级引证文献19

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部