目的 探讨延续性护理干预模式在酒精所致精神障碍患者中的临床应用效果.方法 将102例患者按入院顺序随机分为干预组(50例)和对照组(52例),对照组患者给予一般常规护理干预措施,干预组患者在此基础上予出院后转入居家开放病区加用延续性护理干预模式,并建立延续服务档案,对两组患者随访6个月,采用简明精神病评定量表医学应对问卷(MCMQ)、社会功能缺陷筛选量表(SDSS)和社会支持评定量表(SSRS)评定,并统计两组患者戒酒效果和满意度.结果 干预组与对照组患者相比,在出院时患者社会支持、社会功能、应对方式、戒酒效果等差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);出院后第6个月时,干预组患者的客观支持、主观支持和支持利用度得分分别为(12.68±3.45),(24.68±5.02),(9.88±2.41)分,明显优于对照组的(10.98±3.47),(20.77±5.90),(6.78±2.13)分,差异有统计学意义(t值分别为5.63,5.55,14.07;P＜0.01);干预组患者出院后6个月的MCMQ因子中面对、回避、屈服得分分别为(19.86±3.68),(10.84±1.89),(8.58±2.46)分,明显优于对照组的(15.84±3.65),(16.54±2.88),(13.78±2.47)分,差异有统计学意义(t分别为7.89,9.12,15.75;P ＜0.05).干预组患者出院后6个月SDSS评分为(8.21±1.91)分,明显优于对照组的(10.84±2.14)分,差异有统计学意义(t =3.87,P＜0.05).干预组患者的完全戒酒率为52.00％,限量戒酒率为18.00％,患者满意度为98.00％,明显优于对照组的19.23％,15.38％,84.61％,差异有统计学意义(x2分别为14.504,5.676;P＜0.05).结论 延续性护理干预能够改善患者的社会支持、社会功能、应对方式和戒酒率,提高患者和家属的满意度.
目的 探討延續性護理榦預模式在酒精所緻精神障礙患者中的臨床應用效果.方法 將102例患者按入院順序隨機分為榦預組(50例)和對照組(52例),對照組患者給予一般常規護理榦預措施,榦預組患者在此基礎上予齣院後轉入居傢開放病區加用延續性護理榦預模式,併建立延續服務檔案,對兩組患者隨訪6箇月,採用簡明精神病評定量錶醫學應對問捲(MCMQ)、社會功能缺陷篩選量錶(SDSS)和社會支持評定量錶(SSRS)評定,併統計兩組患者戒酒效果和滿意度.結果 榦預組與對照組患者相比,在齣院時患者社會支持、社會功能、應對方式、戒酒效果等差異無統計學意義(P＞0.05);齣院後第6箇月時,榦預組患者的客觀支持、主觀支持和支持利用度得分分彆為(12.68±3.45),(24.68±5.02),(9.88±2.41)分,明顯優于對照組的(10.98±3.47),(20.77±5.90),(6.78±2.13)分,差異有統計學意義(t值分彆為5.63,5.55,14.07;P＜0.01);榦預組患者齣院後6箇月的MCMQ因子中麵對、迴避、屈服得分分彆為(19.86±3.68),(10.84±1.89),(8.58±2.46)分,明顯優于對照組的(15.84±3.65),(16.54±2.88),(13.78±2.47)分,差異有統計學意義(t分彆為7.89,9.12,15.75;P ＜0.05).榦預組患者齣院後6箇月SDSS評分為(8.21±1.91)分,明顯優于對照組的(10.84±2.14)分,差異有統計學意義(t =3.87,P＜0.05).榦預組患者的完全戒酒率為52.00％,限量戒酒率為18.00％,患者滿意度為98.00％,明顯優于對照組的19.23％,15.38％,84.61％,差異有統計學意義(x2分彆為14.504,5.676;P＜0.05).結論 延續性護理榦預能夠改善患者的社會支持、社會功能、應對方式和戒酒率,提高患者和傢屬的滿意度.
목적 탐토연속성호리간예모식재주정소치정신장애환자중적림상응용효과.방법 장102례환자안입원순서수궤분위간예조(50례)화대조조(52례),대조조환자급여일반상규호리간예조시,간예조환자재차기출상여출원후전입거가개방병구가용연속성호리간예모식,병건립연속복무당안,대량조환자수방6개월,채용간명정신병평정량표의학응대문권(MCMQ)、사회공능결함사선량표(SDSS)화사회지지평정량표(SSRS)평정,병통계량조환자계주효과화만의도.결과 간예조여대조조환자상비,재출원시환자사회지지、사회공능、응대방식、계주효과등차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05);출원후제6개월시,간예조환자적객관지지、주관지지화지지이용도득분분별위(12.68±3.45),(24.68±5.02),(9.88±2.41)분,명현우우대조조적(10.98±3.47),(20.77±5.90),(6.78±2.13)분,차이유통계학의의(t치분별위5.63,5.55,14.07;P＜0.01);간예조환자출원후6개월적MCMQ인자중면대、회피、굴복득분분별위(19.86±3.68),(10.84±1.89),(8.58±2.46)분,명현우우대조조적(15.84±3.65),(16.54±2.88),(13.78±2.47)분,차이유통계학의의(t분별위7.89,9.12,15.75;P ＜0.05).간예조환자출원후6개월SDSS평분위(8.21±1.91)분,명현우우대조조적(10.84±2.14)분,차이유통계학의의(t =3.87,P＜0.05).간예조환자적완전계주솔위52.00％,한량계주솔위18.00％,환자만의도위98.00％,명현우우대조조적19.23％,15.38％,84.61％,차이유통계학의의(x2분별위14.504,5.676;P＜0.05).결론 연속성호리간예능구개선환자적사회지지、사회공능、응대방식화계주솔,제고환자화가속적만의도.
Objective To probe into the clinical application effect of the transitional care model on alcohol-induced mental disorders.Methods One hundred and two patients with alcohol-induced mental disorders were divided into the intervention group (n =50) and the control group (n =52) patients in group according to block randomization method.The control group received routine care interventions; the patients in the intervention group discharged to home in open wards,received transtional care model intervention and established services file on the basis of routine care.The patients were followed up for 6 months,and were surveyed by medical coping modes questionnaire (MCMQ),social dysfunction screening scale (SDSS) and social support rating scale (SSRS).The complex drink rate and satisfaction were analyzed in patients.Results The differences in the social support,social functioning,coping style and complex drink rate were not statistically significant between two groups in the discharge.The scores of the social support,social functioning,coping style and complex drink rate were respectively (12.68 ± 3.45),(24.68 ± 5.02),(9.88 ± 2.41) in the intervention group six months after discharge,and were better than (10.98 ± 3.47),(20.77 ± 5.90),(6.78 ±2.13) in the control group,and the differences were statistically significant (t =5.63,5.55,14.07,respectively; P ＜0.01).The scores of face,avoid and yielding were respectively (19.86 ±3.68),(10.84 ±1.89),(8.58 ± 2.46) in the intervention group six months after discharge,and were better than (15.84 ±3.65),(16.54 ± 2.88),(13.78 ± 2.47) in the control group,and the differences were statistically significant (t =7.89,9.12,15.75,respectively; P＜0.05).The score of SDSS was (8.21 ±1.91) in the intervention group six months after discharge,and was better than (10.84 ± 2.14) in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant (t =3.87,P ＜ 0.05).The total abstinence rate,the limited drinking rate,the satisfaction of patients were respectively 52.00％,18.00％,98.00％ in the intervention group six months after discharge,and were better than 19.23％,15.38％,84.61％ in the control group,and the differences were statistically significant (x2 =14.504,5.676,respectively; P ＜0.05).Conclusions Transtional care model intervention can improve the patients' social support,social function,coping styles and abstinence rate,and improve the satisfaction of patients and their families.
