心血管康复医学杂志
心血管康複醫學雜誌
심혈관강복의학잡지
Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Medicine
2015年
5期
501-504
,共4页
冠心病%心力衰竭%康复%预后
冠心病%心力衰竭%康複%預後
관심병%심력쇠갈%강복%예후
Coronary disease%Heart failure%Rehabilitation%Prognosis
目的：探讨康复运动训练对老年冠心病慢性心力衰竭（CHF）患者心功能和预后的影响。方法：82例老年冠心病CHF患者被随机均分为常规治疗组（接受CHF常规治疗）和运动康复组（在常规治疗基础上接受运动康复训练）。比较两组治疗前后每搏量（SV）、左室射血分数（LVEF）、6min步行距离（6MWD）及NYHA心功能分级的变化，随访12月，比较两组因CHF再次住院率和心源性死亡率。结果：治疗前两组SV、LVEF、6MWD及心功能分级差异无显著性（P＞0.05）。与治疗前比较，治疗后两组SV、LVEF和6MWD均显著增加， NYHA心功能分级均显著降低， P均＜0.01。与常规治疗组比较，治疗后运动康复组SV [（50.8±5.9） ml比（58.6±6.2） ml]， LVEF [（44.9±6.7）％比（50.2±7.2）％]和6MWD [（139.7±18.9） m比（175.2±21.4） m]显著增加，NYHA心功能分级[（2.1±0.5）级比（1.7±0.6）级]显著降低， P均＜0.01。随访12个月期间，运动康复组因CHF再住院率显著低于常规治疗组（9.8％比26.8％）， P＜0.05。结论：运动康复训练可改善老年冠心病慢性心力衰竭患者的心脏功能，提高运动耐力，改善预后，有临床推广应用价值。
目的：探討康複運動訓練對老年冠心病慢性心力衰竭（CHF）患者心功能和預後的影響。方法：82例老年冠心病CHF患者被隨機均分為常規治療組（接受CHF常規治療）和運動康複組（在常規治療基礎上接受運動康複訓練）。比較兩組治療前後每搏量（SV）、左室射血分數（LVEF）、6min步行距離（6MWD）及NYHA心功能分級的變化，隨訪12月，比較兩組因CHF再次住院率和心源性死亡率。結果：治療前兩組SV、LVEF、6MWD及心功能分級差異無顯著性（P＞0.05）。與治療前比較，治療後兩組SV、LVEF和6MWD均顯著增加， NYHA心功能分級均顯著降低， P均＜0.01。與常規治療組比較，治療後運動康複組SV [（50.8±5.9） ml比（58.6±6.2） ml]， LVEF [（44.9±6.7）％比（50.2±7.2）％]和6MWD [（139.7±18.9） m比（175.2±21.4） m]顯著增加，NYHA心功能分級[（2.1±0.5）級比（1.7±0.6）級]顯著降低， P均＜0.01。隨訪12箇月期間，運動康複組因CHF再住院率顯著低于常規治療組（9.8％比26.8％）， P＜0.05。結論：運動康複訓練可改善老年冠心病慢性心力衰竭患者的心髒功能，提高運動耐力，改善預後，有臨床推廣應用價值。
목적：탐토강복운동훈련대노년관심병만성심력쇠갈（CHF）환자심공능화예후적영향。방법：82례노년관심병CHF환자피수궤균분위상규치료조（접수CHF상규치료）화운동강복조（재상규치료기출상접수운동강복훈련）。비교량조치료전후매박량（SV）、좌실사혈분수（LVEF）、6min보행거리（6MWD）급NYHA심공능분급적변화，수방12월，비교량조인CHF재차주원솔화심원성사망솔。결과：치료전량조SV、LVEF、6MWD급심공능분급차이무현저성（P＞0.05）。여치료전비교，치료후량조SV、LVEF화6MWD균현저증가， NYHA심공능분급균현저강저， P균＜0.01。여상규치료조비교，치료후운동강복조SV [（50.8±5.9） ml비（58.6±6.2） ml]， LVEF [（44.9±6.7）％비（50.2±7.2）％]화6MWD [（139.7±18.9） m비（175.2±21.4） m]현저증가，NYHA심공능분급[（2.1±0.5）급비（1.7±0.6）급]현저강저， P균＜0.01。수방12개월기간，운동강복조인CHF재주원솔현저저우상규치료조（9.8％비26.8％）， P＜0.05。결론：운동강복훈련가개선노년관심병만성심력쇠갈환자적심장공능，제고운동내력，개선예후，유림상추엄응용개치。
Objective:To explore the influence of exercise rehabilitation training on cardiac function and prognosis in aged patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) .Methods :A total of 82 aged CHD + CHF patients were randomly divided into routine treatment group (received CHF routine treatment ) and exercise rehabilitation group (received exercise rehabilitation training treatment based on routine treatment ) .Stroke volume (SV) ,left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ,6min walking distance (6MWD) and NYHA cardiac func‐tion class were compared between two groups before and after treatment .Both groups were followed up for 12 months ,and CHF‐caused rehospitalization rate and cardiogenic mortality were compared between two groups .Re‐sults:Before treatment ,there were no significant difference in SV ,LVEF ,6MWD and NYHA cardiac function class between two groups ( P>0.05) .Compared with before treatment ,SV ,LVEF and 6MWD significantly rose and NYHA cardiac function class significantly reduced after treatment in both groups , P<0.01 all .Compared with routine treatment group ,there were significant rise in SV [ (50.8 ± 5.9) ml vs .(58.6 ± 6.2) ml] ,LVEF [ (44.9 ± 6.7)% vs .(50.2 ± 7.2)% ] and 6MWD [(139.7 ± 18.9) m vs .(175.2 ± 21.4) m] ,and significant reduction in NY‐HA cardiac function class [ (2.1 ± 0.5) classes vs .(1.7 ± 0.6) classes] after treatment in exercise rehabilitation group , P<0.01 all .Within 12‐month follow up ,CHF‐caused rehospitalization rate in exercise rehabilitation group was significantly lower than that of routine treatment group (9.8% vs .26.8% ) , P<0.05. Conclusion:Exercise re‐habilitation training can improve cardiac function ,exercise capacity and prognosis in aged CHD + CHF patients , which is worth clinical extending and applicating .
