论文部分内容阅读
目的研究慢性充血性心力衰竭(CHF)急性发作患者采用临床护理路径对其心功能及生活质量的影响。方法 106例CHF急性发作患者,根据入院时间分为对照组和观察组,各53例。对照组予以常规护理,观察组在对照组基础上予以临床护理路径护理。统计对比两组心功能[左室舒张末期内径(LVEDD)、左室收缩末期内径(LVESD)、左室射血分数(LVEF)]改善状况及生活质量水平变化。结果护理前,两组LVEDD、LVESD及LVEF比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。护理后,观察组LVEDD、LVESD低于对照组,LVEF高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。护理前,观察组生活质量总分为(54.89±3.26)分,对照组生活质量总分为(55.04±3.32)分,比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.235,P>0.05);护理后,观察组生活质量总分(36.45±2.51)分,明显低于对照组(43.59±2.89)分,差异有统计学意义(t=13.580,P<0.05)。结论 CHF急性发作患者采用临床护理路径效果显著,可改善患者心功能及生活质量,值得推广。
Objective To study the effects of clinical nursing on cardiac function and quality of life in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic congestive heart failure (CHF). Methods A total of 106 patients with acute exacerbation of CHF were divided into control group and observation group according to the time of admission, each with 53 cases in each group. The control group was given routine care, and the observation group was given nursing care based on the control group. The changes of cardiac function (LVEDD, LVESD, LVEF) and the quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results Before treatment, there was no significant difference in LVEDD, LVESD and LVEF between the two groups (P> 0.05). After nursing, the LVEDD and LVESD in the observation group were lower than those in the control group, and the LVEF was higher in the observation group than in the control group (P <0.05). Before nursing, the total quality of life in the observation group was (54.89 ± 3.26) points, while the control group was (55.04 ± 3.32) points, the difference was not statistically significant (t = 0.235, P> 0.05) The total score of the quality of life in the observation group was 36.45 ± 2.51, which was significantly lower than that in the control group (43.59 ± 2.89), the difference was statistically significant (t = 13.580, P <0.05). Conclusion The acute episode of CHF has significant effect on clinical nursing and can improve the cardiac function and quality of life of patients. It is worth promoting.