欢迎访问心血管病防治知识,今天是

心血管病防治知识 ›› 2022, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (5): 74-76.

• 护理 • 上一篇    下一篇

护理程序导向的整体护理干预在子宫肌瘤合并高血压围术期的效果

蔡丽玲   

  1. 漳州市医院,福建 漳州 363000
  • 出版日期:2022-02-15 发布日期:2022-06-10

Effect of holistic nursing intervention based on nursing procedure in the perioperative period of patients with uterine myoma and hypertension

CAI Li-ling   

  1. Zhangzhou Hospital, Zhangzhou 363000, China
  • Online:2022-02-15 Published:2022-06-10

摘要: 目的 探讨护理程序导向的整体护理干预在子宫肌瘤合并高血压患者围术期的临床效果。方法 选择我院2020年1-12月期间收治的120例子宫肌瘤合并高血压患者,以随机数字表法将这些患者分为60例观察组和60例对照组,对照组患者应用常规护理,观察组患者通过护理程序导向的整体护理干预开展工作,比较两组患者护理后下床活动时间、首次排便时间和住院时间等恢复时间指标以及干预前后SDS评分、SAS评分心理状态改善情况和并发症发生率。结果 观察组患者下床活动时间、首次排便时间和住院时间分别为(23.0±3.2)h、(28.6±5.6)h和(6.6±0.8)d,少于对照组的(28.1±5.6)h、(43.7±12.4)h和(9.9±1.1)d,t值分别为7.298、10.143、22.372,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预前观察组患者SDS评分与SAS评分分别为(63.1±6.1)分和(59.2±7.3)分,干预后下降至(27.7±5.2)分和(31.6±5.5)分,对照组患者干预前分别为(64.4±6.6)分和(59.0±8.5)分,干预后分别是(38.5±5.3)分和(45.4±6.5)分,可见均有所下降,但观察组患者改善效果更好,在SDS于SAS干预后的评分对比中,t值分别是13.378和14.915,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 为子宫肌瘤合并高血压患者提供护理程序导向的整体护理干预,有助于缓解患者的负性情绪,减少并发症的发生,促进尽快恢复。

关键词: 护理程序导向, 整体护理干预, 子宫肌瘤, 高血压, 围术期

Abstract: Objective To investigate the clinical effect of holistic nursing intervention based on nursing procedure in the perioperative period of patients with uterine myoma and hypertension. Methods A total of 120 patients with uterine myoma and hypertension who were admitted to our hospital from January to December in 2020 were enrolled and divided into observation group and control group using a random number table, with 60 patients in each group. The patients in the control group were given routine nursing, and those in the observation group were given holistic nursing intervention based on nursing procedure. The two groups were compared in terms of related recovery time indices (time to ambulation, time to first defecation, and length of hospital stay) after nursing, improvement in psychological state based on Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) scores after intervention, and the incidence rate of complications. Results Compared with the control group, the observation group had significantly shorter time to ambulation (23.0±3.2 h vs 28.1±5.6 h, t=7.298, P<0.05), time to first defecation (28.6±5.6 h vs 43.7±12.4 h, t=10.143, P<0.05), and length of hospital stay (6.6±0.8 d vs 9.9±1.1 d, t=22.372, P<0.05). For the patients in the observation group, there were reductions in SDS score (from 63.1±6.1 points before intervention to 27.7±5.2 points after intervention) and SAS score (from 59.2±7.3 points before intervention to 31.6±5.5 points after intervention), and for the patients in the control group, there were also reductions in SDS score (from 64.4±6.6 points before intervention to 38.5±5.3 points after intervention) and SAS score (from 59.0±8.5 points before intervention to 45.4±6.5 points after intervention); however, the observation group had a better improvement than the control group. There were significant differences in SDS and SAS scores between the two groups after intervention (t=13.378 and 14.915, P<0.05). Conclusion For patients with uterine myoma and hypertension, holistic nursing intervention based on nursing procedure helps to alleviate negative emotion, reduce complications, and promote recovery.

Key words: Nursing procedure orientation, Holistic nursing intervention, Uterine myoma, Hypertension, Perioperative period