CAJ | 학술논문

对农村社区426例老年高血压患者(观察组)和436名非高血压老年人(对照组)应用修订版跌倒效能量表评价其跌倒风险,并比较老年高血压患者有跌倒史组与无跌倒史组的跌倒风险差异.结果显示,观察组评估条目平均得分(8.62±2.15)分,对照组评估条目平均得分(9.35±1.35)分,P＜0.01.老年高血压患者426例中既往有跌倒史的112例评估条目平均得分(6.94±1.85)分,无跌倒史的314例评估条目平均得分(9.22±1.42)分,P＜0.01.提示农村社区老年高血压者跌倒风险高于非高血压者,用评估量表进行风险评估和预测有利于防范老年人意外伤害事件的发生.
대농촌사구426례노년고혈압환자(관찰조)화436명비고혈압노년인(대조조)응용수정판질도효능량표평개기질도풍험,병비교노년고혈압환자유질도사조여무질도사조적질도풍험차이.결과현시,관찰조평고조목평균득분(8.62±2.15)분,대조조평고조목평균득분(9.35±1.35)분,P＜0.01.노년고혈압환자426례중기왕유질도사적112례평고조목평균득분(6.94±1.85)분,무질도사적314례평고조목평균득분(9.22±1.42)분,P＜0.01.제시농촌사구노년고혈압자질도풍험고우비고혈압자,용평고량표진행풍험평고화예측유리우방범노년인의외상해사건적발생.
The fall risk was evaluated with Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (Chinese version) in 426 elderly hypertensive patients (hypertensive group) and 436 elderly people without hypertension (control group) from rural communities in Zhejiang Quzhou areas.The fall risk scores were compared between hypertensive group and control group ; and also between patients with history of falls and those without falls.The results showed that the average score was 8.62 ± 2.15 in hypertensive group and 9.35 ± 1.35 in control group (P ＜ 0.01).The average score was 6.94 ± 1.85 in hypertensive patients with history of falls (n =112) and 9.22 ± 1.42 in without history of falls (n =314) (P ＜0.01).Our study suggests that there is a higher fall risk in elderly hypertensive patients than in elderly people without hypertension; and fall risk assessment with Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (Chinese version) can be used for prediction of fall for the elderly people in rural community.