论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨5A护理干预对肺源性心脏病患者肺功能的影响。方法选取2015年8月—2016年8月襄阳市中心医院收治的肺源性心脏病患者200例,采用随机数字表法分为对照组102例和观察组98例。对照组患者给予常规病症宣传和预后护理干预,观察组患者给予5A(询问、建议、评估、帮助、随访)护理干预。比较两组患者干预前后血气分析指标及肺功能指标,临床疗效及护理满意度。结果两组患者干预前pH值、动脉血二氧化碳分压(PCO_2)、动脉血氧分压(PO_2)及动脉血氧饱和度(SaO_2)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组患者干预后PCO_2低于对照组,pH值、PO_2及SaO_2高于对照组(P<0.05)。两组患者干预前第1秒用力呼气容积(FEV_1)、第一秒用力呼气容积占预计值百分比(FEV1%)及第1秒用力呼气容积与用力肺活量比值(FEV_1/FVC)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组患者干预后FEV_1、FEV1%及FEV_1/FVC高于对照组(P<0.05)。两组患者临床疗效、护理满意度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 5A护理干预能有效改善肺源性心脏病患者血气分析指标及肺功能。
Objective To investigate the effect of 5A nursing intervention on pulmonary function in patients with pulmonary heart disease. Methods 200 patients with pulmonary heart disease admitted from August 2015 to August 2016 in Xiangyang Central Hospital were divided into control group (n = 102) and observation group (n = 98) by random number table. Patients in the control group were given conventional disease publicity and prognosis nursing interventions and observation group patients were given 5A (inquiry, recommendation, assessment, help, follow-up) nursing intervention. Blood gas analysis and pulmonary function indexes, clinical efficacy and nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups before and after intervention. Results There was no significant difference in pH, arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO_2), arterial oxygen pressure (PO_2) and arterial oxygen saturation (SaO_2) between the two groups before intervention (P> 0.05) PCO 2 was lower than control group, pH value, PO 2 and SaO 2 were higher than those in control group after intervention (P <0.05). The forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV 1), forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV 1%) and forced expiratory volume at 1 second and forced vital capacity (FEV 1 / FVC) were compared between the two groups before intervention, The difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). The FEV 1, FEV 1% and FEV 1 / FVC in the observation group were higher than those in the control group (P <0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in clinical efficacy and nursing satisfaction (P> 0.05). Conclusion 5A nursing intervention can effectively improve blood gas analysis and pulmonary function in patients with pulmonary heart disease.