摘要
目的探究正强化干预对急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者心理弹性量表(CD-RISC)评分和健康结局的影响。方法采用电脑随机数字表法将2018年4月至2020年4月我院收治的144例AMI患者,按照1∶1试验设计原则分为两组,各72例。对照组实施常规干预,观察组基于对照组实施正强化干预模式,连续干预1个月。统计两组遵医行为及干预前后CD-RISC、特质应对方式问卷(TCSQ)、社会支持评定量表(SSRS)、健康促进生活方式量表Ⅱ(HPLPⅡ)。结果观察组遵医率88.89%高于对照组73.61%(P<0.05);干预后观察组坚韧、力量、乐观评分高于对照组[(39.91±3.26)分比(34.55±3.12)分;(27.72±3.34)分比(23.34±3.15)分;(10.03±1.21)分比(7.45±1.06)分,均P<0.05];干预后观察组消极应对评分低于对照组[(21.16±4.49)分比(26.63±4.32)分],积极应对评分高于对照组[(33.41±4.04)分比(24.48±4.46)分,P<0.05];干预后观察组主观支持、对社会支持的利用度、客观支持评分高于对照组[(12.12±2.12)分比(10.61±2.17)分;(8.18±0.55)分比(7.55±0.58)分;(11.01±1.44)分比(10.20±1.13)分,均P<0.05];干预后观察组健康责任、营养、运动、自我实现评分高于对照组[(28.81±3.34)分比(24.46±3.18)分;(16.62±2.04)分比(14.48±1.87)分;(22.15±2.53)分比(18.84±3.24)分;(13.33±1.15)分比(12.01±1.26)分,均P<0.05]。结论 AMI患者普遍存在心理弹性低下,消极、悲观应对现象,而正强化干预能增强患者心理弹性水平,转变应对方式,发挥主观能动性以积极态度配合治护工作。
Objective To explore the effect of positive intensive intervention on the score of Psychological Resilience Scale(CD-RISC) and health outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction(AMI).Methods The 144 patients with AMI in our hospital from April 2018 to April 2020 were divided into two groups according to the principle of 1∶1 trial design,with 72 cases in each group.The control group implemented routine intervention,and the observation group implemented positive strengthening intervention mode based on the control group for 1 month.The compliance behavior and CD-RISC,Trait Coping Style Questionnaire(TCSQ),social support rating scale(SSRs) and Health Promoting Lifestyle Scale Ⅱ(HPLPⅡ) before and after intervention were counted.Results The observation group’s compliance rate was 88.89%,higher than that of the control group73.61%(P<0.05);after the intervention,the observation group’s scores of toughness,strength and optimism were higher than those of the control group [(39.91±3.26) points vs.(34.55±3.12) points,(27.72±3.34) points vs.(23.34±3.15) points,(10.03±1.21) points vs.(7.45±1.06) points,P<0.05];after the intervention,the observation group’s negative response score was lower than the control group [(21.16±4.49) points vs.(26.63±4.32) points],and the active response score was higher than the control group [(33.41±4.04) points vs.(24.48±4.46) points,P<0.05];the observation group’s subjective support,utilization of social support and objective support scores were higher than the control group [(12.12±2.12) points vs.(10.61±2.17) points,(8.18±0.55) points vs.(7.55±0.58) points,(11.01±1.44) points vs(10.20 ± 1.13) points,P<0.05];the health responsibility,nutrition,exercise and self-realization scores of the observation group were higher than those of the control group [(28.81±3.34) points vs.(24.46±3.18)points,(16.62 ± 2.04) points vs.(14.48 ± 1.87) points,(22.15 ± 2.53) points vs.(18.84 ± 3.24) points,(13.33 ± 1.15)points vs.(12.01±1.26) points,P<0.05].Conclusion AMI patients generally have lower psychological elasticity,negative and pessimistic coping.Positive intervention can enhance the level of psychological elasticity,change coping styles,give play to subjective initiative,and cooperate with treatment and nursing with a positive attitude.
作者
王一
赵乐妍
陈飞
邵莉
WANG Yi;ZHAO Le-yan;CHEN Fei;SHAO Li(Department of Cardiology,Beijing Friendship Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100050,China)
出处
《中国心血管病研究》
CAS
2022年第1期25-29,共5页
Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular Research
基金
北京市科技计划课题(Z171100001017255)。
关键词
急性心肌梗死
心理弹性量表
应对方式
正强化干预
Acute myocardial infarction
Psycological resilience scale
Coping style
Positive intensive intervention
