Application of standardized rescue nursing process in rescue of acute myocardial infarction
-
摘要:目的 探讨标准化抢救护理流程在急性心肌梗死(AMI)抢救中的应用价值。方法 将100例AMI患者随机分为对照组(常规护理方案救治)与观察组(标准化抢救护理流程救治)各50例, 比较2组分诊评估时间、首份心电图采集时间、抢救时间、焦虑自评量表(SAS)评分、抑郁自评量表(SDS)评分、抢救成功率、护理满意度、住院时间及不良事件发生率。结果 观察组分诊评估时间、首份心电图采集时间、抢救时间显著短于对照组(P < 0.05); 2组干预后SAS评分、SDS评分显著低于干预前，且观察组显著低于对照组(P < 0.05); 观察组抢救成功率、护理满意度显著高于对照组，住院时间显著短于对照组(P < 0.05); 观察组不良事件发生率8.00%, 显著低于对照组24.00%(P < 0.05)。结论 标准化抢救护理流程能缩短AMI患者诊治时间，缓解不良情绪，提高救治成功率，减少不良事件的发生。Abstract:Objective To explore the application value of standardized rescue nursing process in rescue of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).Methods Totally 100 AMI patients were randomly divided into control group (routine nursing program for rescue) and observation group (standardized rescue nursing process for rescue), with 50 cases in each group. The triage evaluation time, acquisition time of the first electrocardiogram (ECG), rescue time, Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) score and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) score, rescue success rate, nursing satisfaction degree, hospitalization time, and incidence rate of adverse events were compared between the two groups.Results The triage evaluation time, acquisition time of the first ECG and rescue time in observation group were significantly shorter than those in control group (P < 0.05). After intervention, SAS score and SDS score in both groups significantly decreased, and the scores mentioned above in observation group were significantly lower than those in control group (P < 0.05). The rescue success rate and nursing satisfaction degree of observation group were significantly higher than those of control group, while hospitalization time was significantly shorter than that of control group (P < 0.05). The incidence rate of adverse events in observation group was 8.00%, which was significantly lower than 24.00% in control group (P < 0.05).Conclusion Application of standardized rescue nursing process in rescue for AMI patients plays positive roles in shortening time of diagnosis and treatment, alleviating adverse emotions, increasing rescue success rate and reducing incidence of adverse events.
-
-
表 1 2组护理效果比较(x±s)
min 组别 分诊评估时间 首份心电图采集时间 抢救时间 观察组(n=50) 0.78±0.43* 6.59±2.08* 31.59±8.28* 对照组(n=50) 3.06±0.58 12.50±3.87 57.49±10.35 与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 2组心理状况比较(x±s)
分 组别 SAS评分 SDS评分 干预前 干预后 干预前 干预后 观察组(n=50) 57.11±3.15 35.05±2.14*# 54.11±3.65 35.36±2.05*# 对照组(n=50) 56.99±3.09 39.81±2.85* 54.08±3.48 41.57±4.03* SAS: 焦虑自评量表; SDS: 抑郁自评量表。与干预前相较, *P < 0.05; 与对照组比较, #P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 2组抢救成功率、住院时间、护理满意度比较(x±s)[n(%)]
组别 抢救成功 住院时间/d 护理满意度/分 观察组(n=50) 48(96.00)* 6.21±2.03* 90.02±7.26* 对照组(n=50) 40(80.00) 9.85±3.36 76.29±6.03 与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 2组不良事件发生情况比较[n(%)]
不良事件 观察组(n=50) 对照组(n=50) 心肌缺血 1(2.00) 3(6.00) 心脏骤停 0 1(2.00) 心力衰竭 1(2.00) 3(6.00) 再梗死 2(4.00) 5(10.00) 总计 4(8.00)* 12(24.00) 与对照组比较, *P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 赵阳, 梁仪, 徐良洁, 等. 地市级医院实施区域化协同救治急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死可行性探讨[J]. 中华心血管病杂志, 2017, 45(8): 10-10. [2] 颜红兵, 向定成, 刘红梅, 等. ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死院前溶栓治疗中国专家共识[J]. 中国实用内科杂志, 2018, 38(5): 56-64. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYNK201805013.htm [3] 蔡伟英, 叶健烽, 莫衬南, 等. 优化护理流程对急性心肌梗死介入时间的影响[J]. 广东医学, 2018, 39(15): 152-154. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GAYX201815038.htm [4] 于江, 赵怀荣, 许玲. 对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死高危患者实施标准化治疗方案的护理[J]. 山东医药, 2012, 52(4): 117-118. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-266X.2012.04.052 [5] 赵冬梅, 裴沛, 于波, 等. 协同护理模式对急性心肌梗死患者心功能及心理状态的影响[J]. 中国全科医学, 2017, 20(12): 365-366. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QKYX2017S3145.htm [6] 李大严, 李小华, 黎福理, 等. 临床护理路径对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死行PCI术患者情绪状态和生活质量的影响[J]. 广东医学, 2018, 39(10): 1590-1592. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-9448.2018.10.037 [7] Lombardi F, Huikuri H, Schmidt G, et al. The decline of rate and mortality of acute myocardial infarction. Almost there, still a long way to go[J]. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 2018, 25(10): 1028-1030. doi: 10.1177/2047487318780497
[8] Jeffrey H, Silber, Alexander F, et al. Failure-to-Rescue After Acute Myocardial Infarction[J]. Medical Care, 2018, 56(5): 416-423. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000904
[9] 牛小伟. 中国和美国急性心肌梗死救治网络实施效果的文献对比[J]. 中国循环杂志, 2018, 33(8): 812-815. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3614.2018.08.018 [10] 赵阳, 梁仪, 徐良洁, 等. 地市级医院实施区域化协同救治急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死可行性探讨[J]. 中华心血管病杂志, 2017, 45(8): 10-10. [11] 郭丽娜, 刘延锦, 王爱霞, 等. 标准化护理协作流程对院内急性缺血性脑卒中患者rt-PA静脉溶栓时间延迟的影响[J]. 广东医学, 2018, 39(17): 2700-2702. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-9448.2018.17.035 [12] 李小峰, 陈敏. 标准化抢救护理流程在急性心肌梗死病人抢救中的应用研究[J]. 护理研究, 2015, 26(7): 861-863. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SXHZ201507033.htm [13] 鲍克娜, 黄蔚萍, 任冬梅, 等. 胸痛中心标准化流程在急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者救治中的建设[J]. 心脑血管病防治, 2018, 23(4): 327-329. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XXFZ201804018.htm [14] 张卉, 武亮, 刁倩. 心肺康复治疗对冠心病患者心肺功能、SAS及SDS评分的影响[J]. 检验医学与临床, 2017, 14(18): 2787-2788. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9455.2017.18.053 [15] 曹隽, 葛梓, 邵江炜, 等. 急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死急诊临床路径的实践分析[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2019, 28(1): 104-106. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0282.2019.01.020 [16] 吴翔. 标准化抢救护理流程在糖尿病并发急性心肌梗死患者抢救中的应用研究[J]. 糖尿病新世界, 2017, 20(22): 88-89. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TNBX201722043.htm [17] 冯婉蓉, 郭晖, 白兰. 标准化急救护理流程在急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者中的临床应用[J]. 广西医学, 2018, 40(14): 126-128. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GYYX201814044.htm [18] 孙慎杰, 吴小鹏, 宋恒良, 等. 血浆和肽素对ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死患者住院期间发生主要不良心脏事件的评估价值[J]. 中国循环杂志, 2015, 30(1): 13-16. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3614.2015.01.005 [19] 朱小翠, 潘寿玲, 邹爱华, 等. 延续护理在急性心肌梗死患者出院后遵医率及生活质量的影响[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2014, (22): 15-17, 21. doi: 10.7619/jcmp.201422005 [20] 周二霞, 李戎霞. 急救护理路径在救治急性心肌梗死患者中的应用效果[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2016, 20(6): 1-3. doi: 10.7619/jcmp.201606001
计量
- 文章访问数:
- HTML全文浏览量:
- PDF下载量:
苏公网安备 32100302010246号
