作者：丁杏，陈霞，李欢，莫春桃

单位：琼海市人民医院 肿瘤血液内科，海南 琼海 571499

Authors: Ding Xing，Chen Xia，Li Huan，Mo Chuntao

Unit: Department of Oncology and Hematology, Qionghai People's Hospital, Qionghai 571499, Hainan, China

摘要：

目的 探讨延续性护理干预对消化道肿瘤患者营养状况和生活质量恢复的临床应用价值。方法 选择琼海市人民医院2019年3月至2021年12月期间收治的98例消化道肿瘤患者为研究对象，采用随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组，每组49例。对照组的干预为常规护理，观察组则是在实施常规护理的基础上，继续进行延续性护理。采用症状自评量表（SCL-90），生活质量综合评定问卷（GQOLI-74）和营养风险评估量表（PG-SGA），分别比较两组患者干预前后心理健康、生命质量、营养状况。结果 干预前两组患者的总体生活质量组间比较，差异无统计学意义（P<0.05）。与干预前比较，干预后两组患者各项症状因子得分、生活质量得分和营养状况均显著提高（P<0.05）。干预后观察组的各项症状因子得分显著低于对照组（P<0.05），生活质量得分显著高于对照组[（189.67±16.45）分比（182.45±15.78）分，P<0.05]；观察组中“营养良好”的患者多于对照组（61.2%比36.7%,P=0.015），“营养中度”显著少于对照组（24.5%比44.9%,P=0.034）。结论 对消化道肿瘤患者采用延续性护理干预能显著缓解其身心痛苦，提高其营养状况和生活质量。

关键词：延续性护理；消化道肿瘤；身心健康；营养状况；生活质量

Abstract：

Objective To explore the clinical value of continuous nursing intervention on the recovery of digestive function and nutritional status in patients with gastrointestinal tumors. Method A total of 98 patients with gastrointestinal tumors treated in our hospital from March 2019 to December 2021 were selected as the research object. They were randomly divided into control group and observation group, with 49 cases in each group. The intervention of the control group was routine nursing, while the observation group continued continuous nursing on the basis of routine nursing. SCL-90, GQOLI-74 and PG-SGA were used to compare the mental health, quality of life and nutritional status of the two groups before and after intervention. Result There was no significant difference in the overall quality of life between the two groups before intervention（P <0.05）. Compared with that before the intervention, the scores of symptom factors, quality of life and nutritional status of the two groups were significantly improved after the intervention （P<0.05）. After the intervention, the scores of symptom factors in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group （P <0.05 ）, and the quality of life was significantly higher than that in the control group [（189.67±16.45） vs （182.45±15.78）, P<0.05]; In the observation group, the patients with "good nutrition" were more than those in the control group （61.2% vs 36.7%, P=0.015）, and the patients with "moderate nutrition" were significantly less than those in the control group （24.5% vs 44.9%, P=0.034）. Conclusion Continuous nursing intervention for patients with gastrointestinal tumors can significantly alleviate their physical and mental pain, improve their nutritional status and quality of life, which is worthy of promotion.

Key Words: Continuous care；Digestive tract tumor；Physical and mental health；Nutritional status；Quality of life