摘要
目的探讨对癌症患者采用人性化护理理念进行疼痛护理干预后获得的临床效果。方法方便选择该院2016年6月-2018年9月收治的106例癌症患者作为实验对象;数字奇偶法分组后明确各组疼痛护理理念;参照组(53例):采用传统护理理念展开对应干预;研究组(53例):采用传统护理理念+人性化护理理念展开对应干预;对比焦虑程度评分、护理满意程度评分以及疼痛程度评分。结果研究组护理前焦虑程度评分为(41.52±4.59)分,护理后为(31.79±2.52)分,参照组护理前焦虑程度评分为(42.02±4.35)分,护理后为(39.59±3.69)分,护理前,研究组癌症患者焦虑程度评分(HAMA评分)同参照组比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.575 6,P>0.05);护理后,研究组癌症患者焦虑评分低于参照组明显,差异有统计学意义(t=12.708 1,P<0.05);研究组护理严谨性评分为(95.23±2.29)分,护理专业性评分为(94.72±2.61)分,护理有效性评分为(93.99±2.65)分,参照组护理严谨性评分为(72.39±2.56)分,护理专业性评分为(79.25±2.39)分,护理有效性评分为(80.11±3.02)分,研究组癌症患者护理严谨性评分、护理专业性评分、护理有效性评分均高于参照组明显,差异有统计学意义(t=48.410 0,31.823 8,25.149 9,P<0.05);研究组护理前疼痛程度评分为(6.22±1.43)分,护理后为(2.52±1.11)分,参照组护理前疼痛程度评分为(6.23±1.41)分,护理后为(4.73±1.53)分,护理前,研究组癌症患者疼痛程度评分(VAS评分)同参照组比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.036 2,P>0.05),护理后,研究组癌症患者疼痛评分低于参照组明显,差异有统计学意义(t=8.511 6,P<0.05)。结论癌症患者在接受疼痛护理干预期间,人性化护理理念的顺利采用,对于患者焦虑程度评分的降低,护理严谨性评分、护理专业性评分、护理有效性评分提升以及疼痛程度评分的降低,作用效果显著,最终对于癌症患者的疼痛缓解、满意度提升、预后改善,奠定基础。
Objective To explore the clinical effects of pain nursing intervention in cancer patients with humanized nursing concept.Methods A total of 106 cancer patients admitted to our hospital from June 2016 to September 2018 were convenient selected as experimental subjects.The digital parity method was used to identify the pain care concepts of each group.The reference group (53 cases): the corresponding intervention was carried out using traditional nursing concepts.The study group (53 cases): using the traditional concept of nursing + humanized nursing concept to carry out corresponding intervention;comparing anxiety degree score,nursing satisfaction degree score and pain degree score.Results The pre-care anxiety score of the study group was (41.52±4.59)points,(31.79±2.52)points after nursing,the pre-care anxiety score of the reference group was (42.02±4.35)points,and the nursing was(39.59±3.69)points.Before the treatment,the anxiety score (HAMA score) of the cancer patients in the study group was not significantly different from that in the reference group(t=0.575 6,P>0.05).After the nursing,the anxiety score of the cancer patients in the study group was lower than that in the reference group,the difference wasstatistically significant(t=12.708 1,P<0.05);the study group's nursing rigor score was (95.23±2.29)points,the nursing professional score was (94.72±2.61)points,the nursing effectiveness score was (93.99±2.65)points,and the reference group nursing rigor The score was (72.39±2.56)points,the nursing professional score was (79.25±2.39)points,and the nursing effectiveness score was (80.11±3.02)points.The study group cancer patient care rigor score,nursing professional score,nursing effectiveness scores were significantly higher than the reference group ,the difference was statistically significant(t=48.410 0,31.823 8,25.149 9,P<0.05);the pre-treatment pain score of the study group was (6.22±1.43) points,and the nursing group was (2.52±1.11) points.Degree of pain was (6.23±1.41) points and (4.73±1.53) points after nursing.Before the nursing,the pain scores (VAS scores) of cancer patients in the study group were not significantly different from those in the reference group (t=0.036 2,P>0.05).After the nursing,the pain score of the cancer patients in the study group was significantly lower than that in the reference group,the difference was statistically significant(t=8.511 6,P<0.05).Conclusion The successful adoption of the concept of humanized care during cancer patients undergoing pain care interventions,the reduction of patients' anxiety scores,the nursing rigor score,the nursing professional scores,the improvement of nursing effectiveness scores,and the reduction of pain scores,whose effect is remarkable,and finally lays a foundation for pain relief,improvement of satisfaction,and improvement of prognosis in cancer patients.
作者
任玉萍
REN Yu-ping(Department of Oncology,Laiwu Central Hospital,Xinwen Mining Group,Xinwen,Shandong Province,271103 China)
出处
《中外医疗》
2019年第23期167-169,188,共4页
China & Foreign Medical Treatment
