作者：王晴雷，宋小俊

单位：重庆三峡中心医院 消化内科，重庆 404000

Authors:  WANG Qinglei, SONG Xiaojun

Unit:  Department of Gastroenterology, Chongqing Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing 404000, China

摘要：

目的  探究胃癌术后患者行基于量化评估方案的护理干预效果及对胃肠功能恢复、生活质量的影响。方法  选取2015年8月至2018年2月本院行胃癌手术患者178例,按随机数表法分两组,均89例。对照组行常规护理,研究组行基于量化评估方案的护理干预,均干预3个月。比较两组胃肠功能恢复情况;疼痛评分[视觉模拟评分法(VAS)]、焦虑评分[焦虑自评量表(SAS)];生活质量评分[欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生存质量核心量表(EORTC QLQ-C30)]。结果  研究组肠鸣音恢复时间、腹胀改善时间、排气恢复时间、排便恢复时间、胃管拔除时间均显著短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预前两组VAS、SAS评分差异无统计意义(P>0.05);干预3 d后研究组VAS、SAS评分低于对照组(P<0.05)。干预前两组生活质量评分差异无统计意义(P>0.05);干预3个月研究组角色、躯体、情绪、认知及社会功能评分、总体健康状况评分均高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论  量化评估方案应用于胃癌术后患者的护理干预有助于加快术后胃肠功能恢复,短时间内缓解疼痛程度及焦虑情绪,促进术后康复及生活质量提高。

关键词： 胃癌; 术后; 量化评估; 护理干预; 胃肠功能; 生活质量

Abstract：

Objective  To investigate the effect of nursing intervention based on quantitative evaluation program and its effect on gastrointestinal function recovery and quality of life in postoperative patients with gastric cancer. Methods  A total of 178 patients with gastric cancer surgery were enrolled in our hospital from August 2015 to February 2018. They were divided into two groups according to the random number table method, all of which were 89 cases. The control group received routine care, and the study group performed nursing intervention based on the rehabilitation quantitative assessment program. Intervened for 3 months. Comparison of gastrointestinal function recovery between the two groups; pain score [visual analogue scale (VAS)], anxiety score [athletic self-rating scale (SAS)]; quality of life score [European Cancer Research and Treatment Organization Quality of Life Core Scale (EORTC QLQ-C30)]. Results  The recovery time of bowel sounds, time of bloating improvement, recovery time of exhaustion, time of recovery of bowel movement, and time of gastric tube removal were significantly shorter in the study group than in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS and SAS scores between the two groups before intervention (P>0.05). After 3 days, the VAS and SAS scores of the study group were lower than those of the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the quality of life scores between the two groups before intervention (P>0.05). The three-month intervention group's role, physical, emotional, cognitive and social function scores, and overall health status scores were higher than the control group. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion  The quantitative evaluation program applied to the nursing intervention of patients with gastric cancer can help to accelerate the recovery of postoperative gastrointestinal function, relieve pain and anxiety in a short period of time, and promote postoperative rehabilitation and quality of life.

Key Words:  Gastric cancer; Postoperative; Quantitative assessment; Nursing intervention; Gastrointestinal function; Quality of life