Application of intervention program based on nursing outcome classification in nursing care for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2024.19.031

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective　To observe the impact of implementing the intervention program based on nursing outcome classification in nursing care for benign prostatic hyperplasia on its nursing quality. Methods　Five hundred and fifty-two with patients benign prostatic hyperplasia admitted to Xianyang Central Hospital between January 2022 and October 2023 were selected and divided into an observation group and a control group according to the different intervention plans, with 276 cases in each group. The observation group were (74.99±5.91) years old; their disease course was (7.03±0.48) months. The control group were (73.52±5.44) years old; their disease course was (7.11±0.57) months. The observation group took the intervention program based on the nursing outcome classification. The control group took the conventional care program. The nursing effects were compared between the two groups. The prostatic states and life quality in both groups were evaluated by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS-CH) and Quality of Life Measurement Scale (The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30, QLQ-C30). The SPSS26.0 software was used to statistically analyze the clinical data. The data were compared by t test. Results　On the day of admission, there were no statistical differences in the scores of IPSS-CH and QLQ-C30 between the two groups (all P>0.05). One day before discharge, the scores of appetite, spirit, daily life, fatigue, and pain and full score of QLQ-C30 and the scores of sleep state, mental sate, and urinary function of nursing effect in the observation group were higher than those in the control group [(33.95±3.77) vs. (31.99±3.64), (34.64±4.08) vs. (32.71±3.89), (32.97±3.66) vs. (30.98±3.43), (35.58±4.32) vs. (33.51±4.22), (37.71±3.91) vs. (35.82±3.77), (172.45±22.45) vs. (161.99±20.33), (40.23±3.65) vs. (37.83±3.22), (39.93±3.22) vs. (36.73±3.11), and (39.18±3.55) vs. (36.99±3.05)], with statistical differences (all P<0.05). The scores of difficulty in holding urine, dysuria, thinning of the urine line, frequent micturition, and number of interruptions of urination of IPSS-CH in the observation group were lower than those in the control group [(1.08±0.11) vs. (1.99±0.25), (1.15±0.19) vs. (1.57±0.33), (1.21±0.16) vs. (1.77±0.20), (1.17±0.15) vs. (1.35±0.25), and (0.99±0.09) vs. (1.32±0.14)], with statistical differences (all P<0.05). Conclusion　Intervention program based on nursing outcome classification for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia can significantly improve the nursing effect, their prostate symptoms, and their quality of life.

Key words:

Benign prostatic hyperplasia, Nursing outcome classification, Nursing effect, Quality of life, Prostate symptoms

摘要：

目的　在良性前列腺增生护理中开展以护理结局分类为基础的干预方案，观察其对护理质量的影响。方法　本文为回顾性研究，选取2022年1月至2023年10月期间咸阳市中心医院收治良性前列腺增生患者552例，根据干预方案不同分为观察组和对照组，各276例。观察组年龄（74.99±5.91）岁，病程（7.03±0.48）个月；实施以护理结局分类为基础的干预方案。对照组年龄（73.52±5.44）岁，病程（7.11±0.57）个月，实施常规护理方案。对比两组护理效果，使用前列腺症状量表（IPSS-CH）和生命质量测定量表（QLQ-C30）于入院当天、出院前1 d对两组患者的前列腺症状和生命质量进行评估。采用SPSS 26.0软件进行分析，组间比较采用t检验。结果　入院当天，两组IPSS-CH、QLQ-C30量表评分差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。出院前1 d，观察组患者QLQ-C30量表评分［食欲（33.95±3.77）分、精神（34.64±4.08）分、日常生活（32.97±3.66）分、疲乏（35.58±4.32）分、疼痛（37.71±3.91）分、总分（172.45±22.45）分］及护理效果评分［睡眠状况（40.23±3.65）分、精神心态（39.93±3.22）分、泌尿功能（39.18±3.55）分］均高于对照组［食欲（31.99±3.64）分、精神（32.71±3.89）分、日常生活（30.98±3.43）分、疲乏（33.51±4.22）分、疼痛（35.82±3.77）分、总分（161.99±20.33）分、睡眠状况（37.83±3.22）分、精神心态（36.73±3.11）分、泌尿功能（36.99±3.05）分］，差异均存在统计学意义（均P<0.05）；观察组患者IPSS-CH量表评分［憋尿困难（1.08±0.11）分、尿不尽（1.15±0.19）分、尿线变细（1.21±0.16）分、尿频（1.17±0.15）分、排尿中断次数（0.99±0.09）分］均低于对照组［憋尿困难（1.99±0.25）分、尿不尽（1.57±0.33）分、尿线变细（1.77±0.20）分、尿频（1.35±0.25）分、排尿中断次数（1.32±0.14）分］，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。结论　以护理结局分类为基础的干预方案可提升良性前列腺增生患者的护理效果，改善前列腺症状表现，提高生活质量。

关键词:

良性前列腺增生, 护理结局分类, 护理效果, 生命质量, 前列腺症状

Gao Juan, Niu Wentao, Zhang Jing, Mao Ling, Zhang Zhihua, Yang Xu, Yang Qiong.

Application of intervention program based on nursing outcome classification in nursing care for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia [J]. International Medicine and Health Guidance News, 2024, 30(19): 3318-3322.

高娟牛文涛张静毛玲张治华杨旭杨琼.

以护理结局分类为基础的干预方案在良性前列腺增生护理中的应用 [J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2024, 30(19): 3318-3322.

References

[1] 谢金波,彭波. 良性前列腺增生的流行病学特征及危险因素研究进展[J]. 同济大学学报(医学版),2021,42(4):568-573. DOI:10.12289/j.issn.1008-0392.20187.
[2] Plochocki A, King B. Medical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. Urol Clin North Am, 2022,49(2):231-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2021.12.003.
[3] Devlin CM, Simms MS, Maitland NJ. Benign prostatic hyperplasia - what do we know? [J]. BJU Int, 2021,127(4):389-399. DOI: 10.1111/bju.15229.
[4] Launer BM, McVary KT, Ricke WA, et al. The rising worldwide impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. BJU Int, 2021,127(6):722-728. DOI: 10.1111/bju.15286.
[5] 耿延花,臧舒婷,张倩倩,等. 基于护理结局分类的护理干预在急性心肌梗死PCI术后患者中的应用[J]. 中华现代护理杂志,2023,29(20):2749-2754. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115682-20220722-03571.
[6] 李胜,曾宪涛,李晓东,等. 良性前列腺增生临床实践指南的质量评价[J]. 中国循证医学杂志,2018,18(1):74-80. DOI:10.7507/1672-2531.201704003.
[7] 牛洪艳,倪静玉,张玲,等. 护理结局分类在我国的应用评价研究[J]. 护理研究,2015(7):842-843,844. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.10096493.2015.07.024.
[8] 杨锐,陆箴琦,顾晓锋. 简体中文版老年男性症状量表的信效度检验[J]. 护理学杂志,2020,35(5):31-34. DOI:10.3870/j.issn.1001-4152.2020.05.031.
[9] 陈昊洋,庄园,杜娴,等. 中文版身体意象相关生活质量量表在系统性红斑狼疮患者中的信效度检验[J]. 解放军护理杂志,2020,37(12):51-54,77. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-9993. 2020.12.013.
[10] 米嘉希,陈慧,曹璐,等. 基于加速康复外科理念的护理在良性前列腺增生患者围术期中的应用[J]. 护理实践与研究,2023,20(1):6-10. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-9676. 2023.01.002.
[11] 于春亚,涂小妹,冯宁翰. 基于护理结局分类的干预对前列腺良性增生患者术后康复的效果观察[J]. 国际护理学杂志,2023,42(11):2018-2022. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn221370-20201228-00494.
[12] 蒋瑜,印琴琴,叶燕华. 护理结局分类对急性胰腺炎患者健康教育效果的影响[J]. 齐鲁护理杂志,2023,29(7):82-84. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7256.2023.07.025.
[13] 薛柳青. 护理结局分类下的护理干预在前列腺良性增生患者术后康复中的效果[J]. 国际护理学杂志,2022,41(15):2851-2855. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn221370-20200805- 00724.
[14] 王斌,郑桃花,黄霞,等. 基于奥马哈护理结局分类系统构建老年糖尿病病人护理敏感性结局指标[J]. 护理研究,2021,35(4):685-689. DOI:10.12102/j.issn. 1009-6493. 2021.04.025.
[15] 冯澳,周丹,林辉,等. 基于护理结局分类系统的成人肝移植受者围术期护理方案的构建[J]. 护理研究,2023,37(21):3799-3807. DOI:10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2023.21.002.
[16] 黄蓉,袁倩,易继群,等. 护理结局分类系统在临床护理实践中的应用研究进展[J]. 护理研究,2022,36(20):3655-3659. DOI:10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2022.20.016.
[17] 丁悦,王宏伟,陈慧兴,等. 多维护理干预在良性前列腺增生术后患者中的应用[J]. 中华男科学杂志,2023,29(9):837-841. DOI:10.13263/j.cnki.nja.2023.09.012.
[18] 黄建璇,李楚华,马幼君. 以护理结局为导向的个案管理在维持性血液透析患者中的应用[J]. 齐鲁护理杂志,2022,28(9):116-120. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7256. 2022.09.036.
[19] 徐红,李慧敏,耿欣. 护理结局分类系统下的健康教育对老年慢性心力衰竭患者的影响[J]. 齐鲁护理杂志,2022,28(1):117-120. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7256.2022.01.043.
[20] 王朵,张丹,桂萍. 腰椎管狭窄症患者应用以结局为导向的强化护理干预临床观察[J]. 中国医药导报,2022,19(28):194-196,封3. DOI:10.20047/j.issn1673-7210.2022.28.45.
[21] 薛柳青,江姗,朱虹. 医养结合模式下延续性护理在老年前列腺增生患者中的应用效果[J]. 现代中西医结合杂志,2023,32(20):2917-2920. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-8849. 2023.20.028.
[22] 余淑萍,邓美丽,廖润兰. 以护理结局为导向的路径模式在老年膝关节置换术患者中的应用[J]. 齐鲁护理杂志,2022,28(18):130-133. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7256. 2022.18.046.
[23] 于婷婷,李妍,覃湘君,等. 基于奥马哈护理结局分类系统构建ICU急性肾损伤患者随访指标体系[J]. 中国实用护理杂志,2023,39(34):2649-2654. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn211501-20230710-01656.
[24] 陶晓坤,王军,赵敏,等. 力学原理下压力性损伤预防护理对老年前列腺增生术后康复的影响[J]. 国际护理学杂志,2024,43(3):463-467. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn221370- 20220819-00112.
[25] 周陵. 心理认知行为护理模式对前列腺增生症手术患者心理状况的影响[J]. 中国医药导报,2022,19(30):150-153. DOI:10.20047/j.issn1673-7210.2022.30.34.