张贤, 周跃, 何欣. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者社区个性化管理效果分析[J]. 上海预防医学, 2017, 29(12): 963-965. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.20180122.007
引用本文: 张贤, 周跃, 何欣. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者社区个性化管理效果分析[J]. 上海预防医学, 2017, 29(12): 963-965. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.20180122.007
Xian ZHANG, Yue ZHOU, Xin HE. Effect analysis on community personalized management for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2017, 29(12): 963-965. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.20180122.007
Citation: Xian ZHANG, Yue ZHOU, Xin HE. Effect analysis on community personalized management for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2017, 29(12): 963-965. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.20180122.007

慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者社区个性化管理效果分析

Effect analysis on community personalized management for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

  • 摘要:
    目的探讨社区个性化管理方案在延缓慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者疾病进程和改善生活质量方面的效果。
    方法80例COPD患者分为干预组和对照组,对干预组患者制定个性化的管理方案,包括健康教育、药物治疗、康复治疗。两组在干预前、后分别进行肺功能测定和自我评估测试问卷(CAT)填写。
    结果干预前、后干预组肺功能第一秒用力呼气量(FEV1%)、1秒钟用力呼气容积占用力肺活量的比值(FEV1%/FVC%)差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),对照组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。干预后,干预组肺功能优于对照组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预前、后干预组CAT评分差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),对照组CAT评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),干预后,干预组CAT评分优于对照组(P<0.05);两组患者体质指数(BMI)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。
    结论社区个性化管理有助于改善COPD患者的肺功能。

     

    Abstract:
    ObjectiveTo investigate the result of the community personalized management program, which was to delay chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD) and improve the quality of life for patients.
    MethodsEighty cases of COPD were divided into intervention group and control group. Personalized management programs were made for intervention group, including health education, drug therapy, and rehabilitation therapy. Before and after intervention, the two groups were assessed by lung function test and asked to fill self assessment test questionnaire respectively.
    ResultsAfter the intervention, in the ratio between the intervention group pulmonary function forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1%) and forced expiratory volume in one second forced vital capacity (FVC%), there was significant difference (P < 0.05), however, the difference with the control group had no significance (P > 0.05). After intervention, lung functions in intervention group were better than those in control group, whose difference was statistically signigicant(P < 0.05). Before and after intervention, the differences in CAT score with intervention group were statistically significant(P < 0.05), while those with control group were not significant(P > 0.05). After intervention, the CAT scores with intervention group were better than those with control group(P < 0.05). The differences in body mass index(BMI) were not significant between the two groups(P > 0.05).
    ConclusionCommunity individualized management is helpful to improvement of lung function

     

/

返回文章
返回