中华健康管理学杂志
中華健康管理學雜誌
중화건강관이학잡지
Chinese Journal of Health Management
2015年
5期
340-344
,共5页
肺疾病,慢性阻塞性%生命质量%慢性病自我管理方法
肺疾病,慢性阻塞性%生命質量%慢性病自我管理方法
폐질병,만성조새성%생명질량%만성병자아관리방법
Pulmonary disease%chronic obstructive%Quality of life%Chronic disease self-management approach
目的 探讨自我管理对社区慢性阻塞性肺疾病(慢阻肺)患者生命质量的影响.方法龙华社区3个居委会共130例慢阻肺患者,随机数字法分为干预组(65例)与对照组(65例),对照组采用常规健康教育模式,干预组实施自我管理教育模式.分别在干预前、干预后6个月采用慢性病自我管理研究测量表中文版及中文版SF-36简表进行测评.结果 干预后6个月,对照组患者的慢性病自我管理量表得分为整体健康(3.52±0.64)、症状(18.86±3.06)、气短(3.92±1.74)、躯体功能(8.15±0.51)及对生活的影响(22.21±7.14)分,干预组患者得分为整体健康(2.43±0.43)、症状(15.68±3.66)、气短(2.06±1.30)、躯体功能(5.73±1.08)及对生活的影响(16.43±5.17)分,有显著改善,两组间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);干预组患者的SF-36生活质量各维度及总分(71.63 ± 8.11)高于对照组(52.41 ± 7.90),两组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 慢阻肺患者进行有效的自我管理,可改善症状,提高自我管理能力及自身生命质量.
目的 探討自我管理對社區慢性阻塞性肺疾病(慢阻肺)患者生命質量的影響.方法龍華社區3箇居委會共130例慢阻肺患者,隨機數字法分為榦預組(65例)與對照組(65例),對照組採用常規健康教育模式,榦預組實施自我管理教育模式.分彆在榦預前、榦預後6箇月採用慢性病自我管理研究測量錶中文版及中文版SF-36簡錶進行測評.結果 榦預後6箇月,對照組患者的慢性病自我管理量錶得分為整體健康(3.52±0.64)、癥狀(18.86±3.06)、氣短(3.92±1.74)、軀體功能(8.15±0.51)及對生活的影響(22.21±7.14)分,榦預組患者得分為整體健康(2.43±0.43)、癥狀(15.68±3.66)、氣短(2.06±1.30)、軀體功能(5.73±1.08)及對生活的影響(16.43±5.17)分,有顯著改善,兩組間差異均有統計學意義(P<0.05);榦預組患者的SF-36生活質量各維度及總分(71.63 ± 8.11)高于對照組(52.41 ± 7.90),兩組間差異有統計學意義(P<0.05).結論 慢阻肺患者進行有效的自我管理,可改善癥狀,提高自我管理能力及自身生命質量.
목적 탐토자아관리대사구만성조새성폐질병(만조폐)환자생명질량적영향.방법룡화사구3개거위회공130례만조폐환자,수궤수자법분위간예조(65례)여대조조(65례),대조조채용상규건강교육모식,간예조실시자아관리교육모식.분별재간예전、간예후6개월채용만성병자아관리연구측량표중문판급중문판SF-36간표진행측평.결과 간예후6개월,대조조환자적만성병자아관리량표득분위정체건강(3.52±0.64)、증상(18.86±3.06)、기단(3.92±1.74)、구체공능(8.15±0.51)급대생활적영향(22.21±7.14)분,간예조환자득분위정체건강(2.43±0.43)、증상(15.68±3.66)、기단(2.06±1.30)、구체공능(5.73±1.08)급대생활적영향(16.43±5.17)분,유현저개선,량조간차이균유통계학의의(P<0.05);간예조환자적SF-36생활질량각유도급총분(71.63 ± 8.11)고우대조조(52.41 ± 7.90),량조간차이유통계학의의(P<0.05).결론 만조폐환자진행유효적자아관리,가개선증상,제고자아관리능력급자신생명질량.
Objective To evaluate the impacts of self-management on quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in community. Method A total of 130 patients with COPD from selected 3 neighbourhood residential committees in Longhua community were randomized into intervention group (65 cases) and control group (65 cases). The control group was treated with conventional health education, the intervention group was treated with self-management education program. Both groups were evaluated by the Chinese version of the chronic disease self-management study measures and SF-36 profile before and after the 6 months intervention. Result After 6 months, the scores of the chronic disease self-management study in the control group were holistic health (3.52 ± 0.64), symptom (18.86 ± 3.06), shortness of breath (3.92 ± 1.74), somatic function (8.15 ± 0.51) and impact on life (22.21 ± 7.14), while the scores in the intervention group were holistic health (2.43±0.43), symptom (15.68±3.66), shortness of breath (2.06 ± 1.30), somatic function (5.73 ± 1.08) and impact on life (16.43 ± 5.17) , and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.01). Compared with the control group, the dimensions and total score of quality of life of the intervention group were (52.41±7.90 vs. 71.63±8.11, P<0.01). Conclusion The effective self-management could improve symptoms, the ability of self-management and their quality of life.
