Efficiency analysis of early cardiac rehabilitation procedures in treating patients after percutaneous coronary intervention
-
摘要:目的 探讨早期心脏康复程序在经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者中的应用效果。方法 将2016年8月—2017年8月行常规干预的经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者51例作为对照组, 将2017年9月—2018年9月行早期心脏康复程序干预的经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者51例作为观察组。比较2组干预前后心功能水平、生存质量,比较2组术后6个月内心血管不良事件发生率。结果 观察组干预2周后左心室射血分数(LVEF)高于对照组,左心室收缩末期容积(LVESV)、左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)和室壁运动积分指数(WMSI)水平低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。观察组干预2周后生理机能、躯体疼痛、生理职能、情感职能、社会功能、精力、一般健康状况、精神健康评分均显著高于对照组(P < 0.05)。观察组恶性心律失常发生率显著低于对照组(P < 0.05)。结论 早期心脏康复程序可改善经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者的心功能水平,提高生存质量,减少心血管不良事件发生。Abstract:Objective To investigate the efficicy of early cardiac rehabilitation procedures in treating patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods From August 2016 to August 2017, 51 patients underwent routine intervention forpercutaneous coronary intervention were selected as control group. From September 2017 to September 2018, 51 patients with early cardiac rehabilitation procedures for percutaneous coronary intervention were selected as observation group. The cardiac function before and after treatment, quality of life and the incidence rate of adverse cardiovascular events after 6 months of operation were compared between two groups.Results After 2 weeks of intervention, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group, and the levels of left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and wall motion integral index (WMSI) were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). After 2 weeks of intervention, the scores of physiological function, physical pain, physiological function, emotional function, social function, energy, general health status and mental health in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The incidence rate of malignant arrhythmia in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05).Conclusion Early cardiac rehabilitation procedures can improve cardiac function of patients with percutaneous coronary intervention, improve quality of life, and reduce cardiovascular adverse events.
-
-
表 1 2组干预前后心功能水平比较(x±s)
时点 组别 LVEF/% LVESV/mL LVEDV/mL WMSI 干预前 对照组(n=51) 58.27±9.75 47.25±4.93 28.15±4.04 2.33±0.73 观察组(n=51) 58.45±9.82 47.19±5.01 28.09±3.89 2.37±0.78 干预2周后 对照组(n=51) 62.17±9.22 42.16±4.82 26.73±4.02 2.13±0.84 观察组(n=51) 69.85±6.82* 36.26±4.28* 22.15±3.94* 1.37±0.46* LVEF: 左心室射血分数; LVESV: 左心室收缩末期容积; LVEDV: 左心室舒张末期容积; WMSI: 室壁运动积分指数。与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。 表 2 2组干预前后生存质量比较(x±s)
分 时点 组别 生理机能 躯体疼痛 生理职能 情感职能 社会功能 精力 一般健康状况 精神健康 干预前 对照组(n=51) 62.37±10.55 54.39±10.32 55.78±9.44 49.37±8.44 62.38±8.47 51.62±8.44 55.36±9.33 55.48±9.31 观察组(n=51) 62.51±10.78 54.18±10.54 55.12±9.93 49.17±8.26 62.95±8.62 51.27±9.03 55.42±9.64 55.52±9.25 干预2周后 对照组(n=51) 66.37±8.25 60.29±9.83 60.29±8.62 54.27±10.25 70.35±8.47 55.71±8.63 59.12±7.51 60.41±9.03 观察组(n=51) 75.38±8.78* 71.38±9.55* 68.34±8.11* 62.35±9.61* 78.37±9.11* 64.11±8.55* 68.44±8.32* 74.28±8.15* 与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。 表 3 2组心血管不良事件发生率比较[n(%)]
组别 心力衰竭 心绞痛 恶性心律失常 对照组(n=51) 1(1.96) 4(7.84) 15(29.41) 观察组(n=51) 0 1(1.96) 2(3.92)* 与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。 -
[1] 陈莉, 莫文平, 吴丽, 等. 经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者自我管理的研究进展[J]. 现代临床护理, 2018, 17(10): 76-81. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-8283.2018.10.016 [2] 杨曾桢, 柏晓玲, 楼婷, 等. 经皮冠状动脉介入术术前访视文献分析及对策研究[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2018, 34(29): 2257-2262. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1672-7088.2018.29.004 [3] Cha N H, Sok S. Effects of position change on lumbar pain and discomfort of Korean patients after invasive percutaneous coronary intervention: a RCT study[J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2016, 28(10): 2742-2747. doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.2742
[4] 董姣姣, 吴克琴. 七步法对改善急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉介入术后心功能的效果观察[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2018, 34(9): 712-716. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1672-7088.2018.09.018 [5] 马蕙, 杨富国, 卢晓虹, 等. 经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者自我管理行为现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2018, 25(20): 1-4. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NFHL201820001.htm [6] 刘海然, 刘庚, 张敏. 我国经皮冠状动脉介入术后出院患者延续性护理的研究进展[J]. 中国护理管理, 2017, 17(9): 1249-1253. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2017.09.022 [7] Haddad N E, Saleh M N, Eshah N F. Effectiveness of nurse-led video interventions on anxiety in patients having percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Int J Nurs Pract, 2018, 24(4): e12645-e12654. doi: 10.1111/ijn.12645
[8] 赵文静. 急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉支架植入术的护理[J]. 天津护理, 2015, 23(3): 224-225. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9143.2015.03.016 [9] 郑晓芳, 曾秋容, 万锦秀, 等. 综合健康教育流程在经皮冠状动脉介入术患者健康教育中的应用[J]. 天津护理, 2017, 25(4): 302-304. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9143.2017.04.009 [10] 刘青. 延续性护理对PCI术后病人生活质量及预后结局的影响[J]. 护理研究, 2017, 31(29): 3741-3744. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6493.2017.29.038 [11] 陈腊年, 李小峰, 孙玉梅. 多学科教育干预模式对经皮冠状动脉介入术后患者健康认知和治疗依从性的影响[J]. 解放军护理杂志, 2017, 34(23): 21-25. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JFHL201723009.htm [12] Wu P J, Wang H T, Sung P H, et al. No correlation between body mass index and 30-day prognostic outcome in Asians with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary coronary intervention[J]. Biomed J, 2017, 40(3): 169-177. doi: 10.1016/j.bj.2016.12.002
[13] 唐楠, 钟梦诗, 李晓波. 积极心理品质对急性心肌梗死介入术后患者疲劳的影响[J]. 护理学杂志, 2017, 32(23): 85-87. doi: 10.3870/j.issn.1001-4152.2017.23.085 [14] 丁飚, 吴俊青, 杨宏琳, 等. 经皮冠状动脉支架植入术后患者自我管理能力现状分析[J]. 上海护理, 2016, 16(2): 17-23. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SHHL201602007.htm [15] 刘慧, 靳艳, 郑婧, 等. 经皮冠状动脉介入术后中青年患者健康促进生活方式现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2016, 23(5): 14-18. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NFHL201605006.htm [16] Mackay M H, Singh R, Boone R H, et al. Outcomes following percutaneous coronary revascularization among South Asian and Chinese Canadians[J]. BMC Cardiovasc Disord, 2017, 17(1): 101-107. doi: 10.1186/s12872-017-0535-0
[17] 卓茹. 不同心脏康复程序用于急性心肌梗死患者术后心脏康复的疗效对比研究[J]. 现代中西医结合杂志, 2015, 24(4): 434-436. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-8849.2015.04.037 [18] 蔡泽坤, 徐琳, 马骏, 等. 早期心脏康复程序对急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉介入术后心脏收缩功能的影响[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2017, 32(4): 391-395. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2017.04.003 [19] 董建红. 不同心脏康复程序对女性心脏病患者整体生活质量的影响[J]. 中国心血管病研究杂志, 2014(6): 531-534. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5301.2014.06.016
计量
- 文章访问数: 348
- HTML全文浏览量: 98
- PDF下载量: 8