期刊文献+

Roy适应模式实施心理舒适护理在产后抑郁症患者中应用的效果 预览 被引量:36

Effect of Roy adaptation model implementation of psychological comfort care in patients with postpartum depression
在线阅读 下载PDF
收藏 分享 导出
摘要 目的探讨Roy适应模式实施心理舒适护理在产后抑郁症患者中应用的效果。方法选取2013年6月~2015年6月入住惠州市复员退伍军人医院的78例产后抑郁症患者纳入研究。采用随机数字表法将患者分为观察组和对照组,每组各39例。对照组给予常规护理措施,观察组患者在实施常规护理措施基础上给予Roy适应模式中的心理舒适护理措施。护理干预前和护理干预8周后采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)、爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)、简易应对方式问卷(SCSQ)及护理满意度对患者进行调查分析。结果护理干预8周后,观察组HAMD得分[(13.24±1.34)分]低于对照组[(20.27±1.52)分]和护理干预前[(22.36±2.14)分](t=9.68、13.07,P〈0.05);EPDS得分[(12.45±1.70)分]低于对照组[(18.56±2.84)分]和护理干预前[(20.54±2.76)分1(t=8.79、11.57,P〈0.05);HAMA得分[(12.27±2.80)分]低于对照组[(24.67±3.43)分]和护理干预前[(27.18±3.82)分](t=13.21、14.33,P〈0.05)。观察组干预前后SCSQ量表中积极评分[(16.03±4.21)、(21.47±4.23)分]及消极评分[(13.12±3.07)、(10.19±3.56)分]比较,差异均有统计学意义(t=6.18、3.37,P〈0.05);观察组和对照组护理干预8周后SCSQ量表中积极评分[(21.47±4.23)分比(16.78±4.15)分1比较,差异有统计学意义(t=6.23,P〈0.05);观察组和对照组护理满意度(97.44%比69.23%)比较,差异有统计学意义(χ^2=13.54。P〈0.05)。结论运用Roy适应模式对产后抑郁症患者施行心理舒适护理可明显改善患者的抑郁、焦虑状态。增强患者积极应对各种刺激的适应能力,并明显提高了患者的护理满意度。 Objective To explore the effect of Roy adaptation model implementation of psychological comfort care in patients with postpartum depression. Methods 78 patients with postpartum depression in the Demobilized Veterans Hospital of Huizhou City from June 2013 to June 2015 were selected. The patients were randomly divided into control group and observation group using random number table, with 39 cases in each group. The control group was given usual nursing, the observation group was given Roy Adaptation Model nursing. Before and after 8 weeks of nursing intervention, the data of the patients were analyzed with Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA), Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ) and nursing satisfaction for patients. Results After 8 weeks of nursing intervention, HAMD score in the observation group [(13.24 ± 1.34) scores] was lower than that of the control group [(20.27 ± 1.52) scores] and before nursing intervention [(22.36 ± 2.14) scores](t=9.68, 13.07; P 〈 0.05); EPDS score in the observation group [(12.45±1.70) scores] was lower than that of the control group [(18.56±2.84) scores] and before nursing intervention [(20.54±2.76) scores] (t=8.79, 11.57; P 〈 0.05); HAMA score in the observation group [(12.27±2.80) scores]was lower than that of the control group (24.67±3.43) scores and before nursing intervention score (t=13.21, 14.33; P 〈 0.05). Before and after the intervention in the observation group, the positive score[ (16.03±4.21) scores vs (21.47±4.23) scores ] and negative score[ (13.12±3,07) scores vs (10.19 ± 3.56) scores]of SCSQ score were compared, the differences were statistically significant (t=6.18, 3.37; P 〈 0.05), after 8 weeks of nursing intervention, positive score [(21.47±4.23),(16.78±4.15) scores] in the observation group and the control group was compared, the difference was statistically significan
作者 卢雪珍 陈文霞 吴辉霞 LU Xuezhen, CHEN Wenxia ,WU Huixia( Department of Psychiatric, the Demobilized Veterans Hospital of Huizhou City, Guangdong Province, Huizhou 516008, China)
出处 《中国医药导报》 CAS 2016年第22期168-171,共4页 China Medical Herald
基金 广东省惠州市科技计划项目(2013Y205).
关键词 产后抑郁症 ROY适应模式 心理舒适护理 汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD) 爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS) 汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA) 简易应对方式问卷(SCSQ) 护理满意度 Postpartum depression Roy adaptation model Psychological comfort care Hamilton Depression Scale Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale Hamilton Anxiety Scale Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire Nursing satisfaction
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

二级参考文献117

共引文献167

同被引文献221

引证文献36

二级引证文献36

投稿分析

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈
新型冠状病毒肺炎防控与诊疗专栏