個性化護(hù)理干預(yù)在腎功能失代償期IgA腎病患者護(hù)理中的應(yīng)用效果分析

袁娜

[摘要] 目的 觀察并探討個性化護(hù)理干預(yù)在腎功能失代償期IgA腎病患者護(hù)理中的應(yīng)用效果。 方法 方便選取2018年1—12月期間的72例腎功能失代償期IgA腎病患者當(dāng)作研究對象。按照護(hù)理方案的不同，將72例患者分為2組，各36例。對照組采取常規(guī)護(hù)理干預(yù)，研究組采取個性化護(hù)理干預(yù)。觀察并比較2組的護(hù)理效果。結(jié)果 研究組的總有效率94.44%明顯高于對照組的72.22%，差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義（χ2=5.625，P=0.021）;研究組的護(hù)理滿意度97.22%明顯高于對照組的80.56%，差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義（χ2=5.556，P=0.022）;護(hù)理后，研究組的CD4+（42.36±3.58）個/mm3、CD4+/CD8+（1.12±0.23）、尿蛋白（253.16±55.32）mg/d明顯低于對照組的CD4+（51.63±4.12）個/mm3、CD4+/CD8+（1.31±0.28）、尿蛋白（325.24±71.36）mg/d，差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義（t=6.152、5.221、8.416，P=0.015、0.028、0.002），研究組的CD8+（39.25±3.46）個/mm3與對照組的CD8+（39.37±3.64）個/mm3比較，差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義（t=1.513，P=0.072）。結(jié)論 個性化護(hù)理干預(yù)在腎功能失代償期IgA腎病患者護(hù)理中的應(yīng)用效果顯著，值得推廣。

[關(guān)鍵詞] 個性化護(hù)理干預(yù);腎功能失代償期IgA腎病;護(hù)理

[中圖分類號] R473? ? ? ? ? [文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號] 1674-0742（2019）07（c）-0133-03

Analysis of the Application Effect of Personalized Nursing Intervention in the Nursing of Patients with Decompensated Renal Function IgA Nephropathy

YUAN Na

Department of Nephrology， the First Affiliated Hospital of Baotou Medical College， Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology， Baotou， Inner Mongolia， 014010 China

[Abstract] Objective To observe and explore the application effect of personalized nursing intervention in the nursing of patients with decompensated renal function IgA nephropathy. Methods Convenient select seventy-two patients with renal decompensated IgA nephropathy from January to December 2018 were enrolled. According to the different care plans， 72 patients were divided into 2 groups， 36 cases each. The control group received routine nursing intervention and the study group took personalized nursing intervention. Observe and compare the care effects of the 2 groups. Results The total effective rate of the study group was 94.44%， which was significantly higher than that of the control group （72.22%）. The difference was statistically significant （χ2=5.625， P=0.021）. The nursing satisfaction of the study group was 97.22%， which was significantly higher than that of the control group （80.56%）. The difference was statistically significant （χ2=5.556， P=0.022）; after treatment， the study group had significantly lower CD4+（42.36±3.58）/mm3， CD4+/CD8+（1.12±0.23）， and urinary protein （253.16±55.32） mg/d. In the control group， CD4+（51.63±4.12）/mm3， CD4+/CD8+（1.31±0.28）， and urinary protein （325.24±71.36） mg/d， the difference was statistically significant （t=6.152， 5.221， 8.416， P=0.015， 0.028， 0.002）， the study group's CD8+ （39.25±3.46）/mm3 compared with the control group of CD8+（39.37±3.64）/mm3， the difference was not statistically significant （t=1.513， P=0.072）. Conclusion The application of personalized nursing intervention in the nursing of patients with decompensated renal function IgA nephropathy is significant and worthy of promotion.