临床医学工程
臨床醫學工程
림상의학공정
CLINICAL MEDICAL ENGINEERING
2014年
8期
1065-1066,1069
,共3页
刁秋莺%何兰英%张素平%张会娜
刁鞦鶯%何蘭英%張素平%張會娜
조추앵%하란영%장소평%장회나
健康教育%流浪%精神分裂症%康复
健康教育%流浪%精神分裂癥%康複
건강교육%류랑%정신분렬증%강복
Health education%Homeless%Schizophrenia%Rehabilitation
目的:探讨健康教育对流浪精神分裂症患者的影响,以促进救治工作的更好开展。方法选取住院患者共100例,分为干预组与对照组各50例,两组均接受精神科常规治疗和护理,干预组在此基础上实施健康教育和康复训练。分别在干预前、干预12周末、干预24周末采用简明精神病量表(BPRS)、自知力与治疗态度问卷(ITAQ)、日常生活能力量表(ADL)、服药±从性量表进行评定,比较分析两组的评分。结果干预后两组BPRS总分及各因子分均较干预前显著下降(P<0.01),干预后干预组在12周末总分和焦虑抑郁、缺乏活力、敌对猜疑三个因子分分别为53.14±6.73、9.31±3.55、10.53±4.07、6.53±2.55,均显著低于对照组的69.06±7.87、12.04±3.43、13.84±4.97、9.24±3.22(P<0.01),在思维障碍和激活性两个因子分没有显著性差异(P>0.05);干预后干预组ADL评分总分和各因子分在12周末、24周末均较干预前显著下降(P<0.01),而对照组没有显著性差异(P>0.05),干预后两组间比较,有显著性差异(P<0.01)。结论健康教育能明显提高流浪精神分裂症患者的社会功能和社会适应能力。
目的:探討健康教育對流浪精神分裂癥患者的影響,以促進救治工作的更好開展。方法選取住院患者共100例,分為榦預組與對照組各50例,兩組均接受精神科常規治療和護理,榦預組在此基礎上實施健康教育和康複訓練。分彆在榦預前、榦預12週末、榦預24週末採用簡明精神病量錶(BPRS)、自知力與治療態度問捲(ITAQ)、日常生活能力量錶(ADL)、服藥±從性量錶進行評定,比較分析兩組的評分。結果榦預後兩組BPRS總分及各因子分均較榦預前顯著下降(P<0.01),榦預後榦預組在12週末總分和焦慮抑鬱、缺乏活力、敵對猜疑三箇因子分分彆為53.14±6.73、9.31±3.55、10.53±4.07、6.53±2.55,均顯著低于對照組的69.06±7.87、12.04±3.43、13.84±4.97、9.24±3.22(P<0.01),在思維障礙和激活性兩箇因子分沒有顯著性差異(P>0.05);榦預後榦預組ADL評分總分和各因子分在12週末、24週末均較榦預前顯著下降(P<0.01),而對照組沒有顯著性差異(P>0.05),榦預後兩組間比較,有顯著性差異(P<0.01)。結論健康教育能明顯提高流浪精神分裂癥患者的社會功能和社會適應能力。
목적:탐토건강교육대류랑정신분렬증환자적영향,이촉진구치공작적경호개전。방법선취주원환자공100례,분위간예조여대조조각50례,량조균접수정신과상규치료화호리,간예조재차기출상실시건강교육화강복훈련。분별재간예전、간예12주말、간예24주말채용간명정신병량표(BPRS)、자지력여치료태도문권(ITAQ)、일상생활능역량표(ADL)、복약±종성량표진행평정,비교분석량조적평분。결과간예후량조BPRS총분급각인자분균교간예전현저하강(P<0.01),간예후간예조재12주말총분화초필억욱、결핍활력、활대시의삼개인자분분별위53.14±6.73、9.31±3.55、10.53±4.07、6.53±2.55,균현저저우대조조적69.06±7.87、12.04±3.43、13.84±4.97、9.24±3.22(P<0.01),재사유장애화격활성량개인자분몰유현저성차이(P>0.05);간예후간예조ADL평분총분화각인자분재12주말、24주말균교간예전현저하강(P<0.01),이대조조몰유현저성차이(P>0.05),간예후량조간비교,유현저성차이(P<0.01)。결론건강교육능명현제고류랑정신분렬증환자적사회공능화사회괄응능력。
Objective To explore the influence of health education on the homeless patients with schizophrenia, in order to promote better work of treatment. Methods 100 hospitalized homeless patients were selected and divided into the intervention group and control group, with 50 cases in each group. Both groups received the routine therapy and nursing of psychiatric department, in addition, patients in the intervention group received health education and rehabilitation training. Before intervention, at the end of 12 weeks and 24 weeks of intervention, brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS), insight and treatment attitude questionnaire (ITAQ), activities of daily living scale (ADL) and medication adherence scale were used to compare between two groups. Results After intervention, the total score and each score of BPRS of both groups decreased significantly (P<0.01);The total score, score of anxiety depression, score of lack of energy and score of hostile suspicion of intervention group after intervention were 53.14 ± 6.73, 9.31 ± 3.55, 10.53 ± 4.07 and 6.53 ± 2.55 respectively, significantly lower than 69.06±7.87, 12.04±3.43, 13.84±4.97, 9.24±3.22 of control group after intervention correspondingly (P<0.01);There were no statistical differences in the score of thought disorder and score of activation after intervention between two groups (P>0.05). The total score and each score of ADL of intervention group decreased significantly at the end of 12 weeks and 24 weeks of intervention (P<0.01), but in control group, there were no statistical differences compared with those before intervention;There were statistical differences between two groups after intervention (P <0.01). Conclusions Health education can significantly improve the social function and social adaptation ability of homeless patients with schizophrenia.