Effect of high quality nursing in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2018.04.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the effect of comprehensive intervention nursing(CIN)in improving the symptoms of severe acute pancreatitis(SAP).

Methods

A total of 120 patients diagnosed as SAP were included in this study from July 2013 to July 2017.All patients were randomly divided into observation group and control group according to the random number table method, 60 patients in each group.The patients in control group were given routine nursing intervention, while the patients in observation group were given CIN on the basis of routine nursing intervention.The nursing satisfaction, abdominal symptoms, complications and hospitalization time of the two groups were compared comprehensively.

Results

The observation group was better than the control group in the aspects of nursing satisfaction, improvement of abdominal pain symptoms, exhaust defecation time, hospitalization time and the duration of severe complications, and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).

Conclusion

The CIN for patients with SAP can improve the symptom remission rate and overall satisfaction.It is worthy of clinical promotion.

Key words: Severe acute pancreatitis, Comprehensive intervention nursing, Effect

Xiangying Xu, Minxiu Shi, Shuxia Guo, Weijing Li. Effect of high quality nursing in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2018, 08(04): 178-182.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2018.04.009

https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2018/V08/I04/178

Figures/Tables 4

References 10

1	Johnson CD, Besselink MG, Carter R. Acute pancreatitis[J]. BMJ, 2014, 349: g4859.
2	罗金燕，林婕．心理干预在重症急性胰腺炎ICU护理中的应用研究[J]．中国继续医学教育, 2016, 8(32): 249-250.
3	Talukdar R, Vege SS.Acute pancreatitis.[J]Curr Opin Gastroenterol, 2015, 31(5): 374-379.
4	张燕．重症急性胰腺炎的护理体会[J]．基层医学论坛, 2011, 15(2): 119-120.
5	Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, et al.Classification of acute pancreatitis-2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus[J]. Gut, 2013, 62(1): 102-111.
6	沈绚丽，楼立兰，张筱风．急性复发性胰腺炎内镜下十二指肠乳头切开术后并发症的观察和护理[J]．护理与康复, 2004, 3(1): 39-40.
7	吴莹，苏华科．急性重症胰腺炎内科综合治疗的护理[J]．华北煤炭医学院学报, 2009, 11(5): 91-92.
8	王彩霞．重症急性胰腺炎患者的护理措施探讨[J]．实用临床护理学杂志, 2017, 2(7): 189-190.
9	贾兰芳，卢晓静，刘富德．心理护理干预对重症急性胰腺炎患者焦虑的影响[J]．承德医学院学报, 2017, 34(1): 43-45.
10	李建萍，叶文琴，田梅梅．重症急性胰腺炎患者监护期间实施临床路径的效果[J]．解放军护理杂志, 2012, 29(2B): 17-22.

组别	例数	性别(例)		高血压(例)	冠心病(例)	糖尿病(例)	脂肪肝(例)	慢性支气管炎(例)
组别	例数	男性	女性	高血压(例)	冠心病(例)	糖尿病(例)	脂肪肝(例)	慢性支气管炎(例)
观察组	60	50	10	20	6	8	12	3
对照组	60	46	14	16	8	10	15	5
t/χ²值	?	0.83	?	0.63	0.32	0.29	0.43	0.54
P值	?	0.363	?	0.428	0.571	0.261	0.514	0.47
组别	例数	发病因素与诱因(例)				年龄构成(岁，±s)	体质量指数(kg/m²，±s)	体重(±s，kg)
组别	例数	胆系结石	高脂血症	饮酒史	其他因素	年龄构成(岁，±s)	体质量指数(kg/m²，±s)	体重(±s，kg)
观察组	60	40	10	5	5	45.3±5.1	22.6±3.1	77.7±9.5
对照组	60	38	8	7	7	44.2±7.1	23.3±3.4	76.3±8.4
t/χ²值	?	0.146	0.261	0.37	0.37	0.97	1.18	0.85
P值	?	0.702	0.61	0.545	0.545	0.331	0.24	0.393
组别	例数	C反应蛋白(mg/L，±s)	APACHE评分(±s)	腹痛时间(h，±s)	腹胀时间(h，±s)	停止排气便时间(h，±s)	干预前满意人数	干预前满意度评分(±s)
观察组	60	285.4±44.7	11.6±2.4	5.0±3.9	9.6±2.6	13.5±10.2	58	28.5±1.5
对照组	60	286.5±47.6	12.1±2.7	4.86±2.9	9.8±3.2	14.3±9.8	56	27.89±2.11
t/χ²值	?	0.13	1.21	0.22	0.38	0.44	0.702	1.81
P值	?	0.896	0.226	0.823	0.707	0.661	0.404	0.07

组别	例数	性别(例)		高血压(例)	冠心病(例)	糖尿病(例)	脂肪肝(例)	慢性支气管炎(例)
组别	例数	男性	女性	高血压(例)	冠心病(例)	糖尿病(例)	脂肪肝(例)	慢性支气管炎(例)
观察组	60	50	10	20	6	8	12	3
对照组	60	46	14	16	8	10	15	5
t/χ²值	?	0.83	?	0.63	0.32	0.29	0.43	0.54
P值	?	0.363	?	0.428	0.571	0.261	0.514	0.47
组别	例数	发病因素与诱因(例)				年龄构成(岁，±s)	体质量指数(kg/m²，±s)	体重(±s，kg)
组别	例数	胆系结石	高脂血症	饮酒史	其他因素	年龄构成(岁，±s)	体质量指数(kg/m²，±s)	体重(±s，kg)
观察组	60	40	10	5	5	45.3±5.1	22.6±3.1	77.7±9.5
对照组	60	38	8	7	7	44.2±7.1	23.3±3.4	76.3±8.4
t/χ²值	?	0.146	0.261	0.37	0.37	0.97	1.18	0.85
P值	?	0.702	0.61	0.545	0.545	0.331	0.24	0.393
组别	例数	C反应蛋白(mg/L，±s)	APACHE评分(±s)	腹痛时间(h，±s)	腹胀时间(h，±s)	停止排气便时间(h，±s)	干预前满意人数	干预前满意度评分(±s)
观察组	60	285.4±44.7	11.6±2.4	5.0±3.9	9.6±2.6	13.5±10.2	58	28.5±1.5
对照组	60	286.5±47.6	12.1±2.7	4.86±2.9	9.8±3.2	14.3±9.8	56	27.89±2.11
t/χ²值	?	0.13	1.21	0.22	0.38	0.44	0.702	1.81
P值	?	0.896	0.226	0.823	0.707	0.661	0.404	0.07

组别	例数	腹痛消失	腹胀时间	肠鸣音恢复	排气排便	并发症	住院时间
观察组	60	8.82±2.01	10.14±1.02	8.24±2.12	8.44±1.18	2.34±1.10	14.15±1.6
对照组	60	10.25±1.5	11.5±2.01	9.52±1.50	9.68±1.90	3.42±1.80	15.39±1.5
t值	?	4.24	4.47	3.71	4.14	3.84	4.21
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	腹痛消失	腹胀时间	肠鸣音恢复	排气排便	并发症	住院时间
观察组	60	8.82±2.01	10.14±1.02	8.24±2.12	8.44±1.18	2.34±1.10	14.15±1.6
对照组	60	10.25±1.5	11.5±2.01	9.52±1.50	9.68±1.90	3.42±1.80	15.39±1.5
t值	?	4.24	4.47	3.71	4.14	3.84	4.21
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	满意[例(%)]	一般[例(%)]	不满意[例(%)]	平均得分(±s)
观察组	60	50(83.3)	10(16.7)	0	27.38±1.32
对照组	60	40(66.7)	15(25.0)	5(8.3)	23.84±1.35
χ²/t值	?	4.44	?	?	10.55
P值	?	0.039	?	?	<0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export