CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨全人照护模式在老年肺癌患者康复护理中的应用效果。方法将84例老年肺癌患者随机分为对照组和干预组各42例，对照组采用常规的整体护理模式康复护理，干预组在常规此基础上实施全人照护模式，采用生命质量测评量表（ FACT）、抑郁自评量表（ SDS）、焦虑自评量表（ SAS）评价两组护理效果。结果干预前两组患者FACT各分量表评分及SDS、SAS评分比较差异均无统计学意义（P＞0．05）；干预后干预组FACT各分量表评分分别为（69．99±1．45），（69．87±2．54），（70．24±1．36），（69．25±2．02），（68．24±1．41）分，均高于对照组与干预前，差异均有统计学意义（P＜0．05）；对照组干预前后FACT各分量表评分比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0．05）；干预后干预组患者SDS、SAS评分分别为（33．893±4．257），（29．754±3．896）分，均低于对照组（39．450±5．058），（34．639±5．785）分，差异均有统计学意义（t值分别为-1．023，1．903；P＜0．05）。结论全人照护模式对提高肺癌患者的整体生存质量具有积极意义，值得临床推广。
목적：탐토전인조호모식재노년폐암환자강복호리중적응용효과。방법장84례노년폐암환자수궤분위대조조화간예조각42례，대조조채용상규적정체호리모식강복호리，간예조재상규차기출상실시전인조호모식，채용생명질량측평량표（ FACT）、억욱자평량표（ SDS）、초필자평량표（ SAS）평개량조호리효과。결과간예전량조환자FACT각분량표평분급SDS、SAS평분비교차이균무통계학의의（P＞0．05）；간예후간예조FACT각분량표평분분별위（69．99±1．45），（69．87±2．54），（70．24±1．36），（69．25±2．02），（68．24±1．41）분，균고우대조조여간예전，차이균유통계학의의（P＜0．05）；대조조간예전후FACT각분량표평분비교차이무통계학의의（P＞0．05）；간예후간예조환자SDS、SAS평분분별위（33．893±4．257），（29．754±3．896）분，균저우대조조（39．450±5．058），（34．639±5．785）분，차이균유통계학의의（t치분별위-1．023，1．903；P＜0．05）。결론전인조호모식대제고폐암환자적정체생존질량구유적겁의의，치득림상추엄。
Objective To explore the application effect of four integrated nursing model in rehabilitation nursing of elderly patients with lung cancer .Methods Eighty-four elderly patients with lung cancer were chosen and were randomly divided into the control group and the intervention group , each with 42 cases.The control group received the routine holistic nursing mode , and the intervention group received the four integrated nursing model on the basis of the control group .The nursing effect was evaluated by the FACT , self-rating depression scale ( SDS ) and self -rating anxiety scale ( SAS ) in two groups .Results No differences were found in the scores of FACT , SDS, SAS between two group before the intervention (P>0.05). The scores of every scales of FACT were respectively (69.99 ±1.45), (69.87 ±2.54), (70.24 ±1.36), (69.25 ±2.02), (68.24 ±1.41) in the intervention group after the intervention , and were higher than those of the control group and those before the intervention (P<0.05).No differences were found in the scores of every scales of FACT in the control group before and after the intervention (P>0.05).The scores of SDS and SAS were respectively (33.893 ±4.257), (29.754 ±3.896) in the intervention group after the intervention , and were lower than (39.450 ±5.058), (34.639 ±5.785) in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (t=-1.023,1.903, respectively;P<0.05).Conclusions The four integrated nursing model has a positive significance on the improvement of the overall quality of life in patients with lung cancer , and is worthy of the clinical promotion .