急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后急性心理应激潜在剖面分析

Potential profile analysis of acute psychological stress in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention

  • 摘要:
    目的  探讨急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后急性心理应激现状。
    方法  选取150例急性心肌梗死行PCI的患者为研究对象。采用基本信息问卷、斯坦福急性应激反应问卷(SASRQ)以及生活质量综合评定问卷(GQOLI-74)对患者进行问卷调查。
    结果  急性心肌梗死行PCI后患者的急性心理应激得分为(45.38±8.94)分。患者急性心理应激分为3个潜在剖面类别,分别为低应激(C1组, n=53)、中度应激障碍高回避(C2组, n=59)和重度应激障碍反复体验(C3组, n=30)。3组的年龄、性别、居住方式及胸痛评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。急性心肌梗死行PCI后患者的生活质量评分为(194.67±34.95)分。C1组患者的生活质量水平高于C2组和C3组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01); C2组患者的生活质量水平高于C3组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。
    结论  临床工作人员应辨别不同类别患者的特征,重视潜在剖面为重度应激障碍反复体验的患者,并及时开展必要的心理干预,以改善患者后续治疗效果及预后。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective  To investigate the current status of acute psychological stress among patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
    Methods  A total of 150 patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent PCI were selected as study subjects. The patients were surveyed through questionnaires usingBasic Information Questionnaire, the Stanford Acute Stress Response Questionnaire (SASRQ) and Comprehensive Quality of Life Assessment Questionnaire (GQOLI-74).
    Results  The score of acute psychological stress in patients with acute myocardial infarction after PCI was (45.38±8.94). The acute psychological stress of patients was divided into three potential profile categories, namely low stress (C1 group, n=53), moderate stress disorder with high avoidance (C2 group, n=59), and severe stress disorder with repeated experience (C3 group, n=30). There were statistically significant differences in age, gender, residence style and chest pain score among the three groups (P < 0.05). The score of quality of life for patients with acute myocardial infarction after PCI was (194.67±34.95). The quality of life level of patients in C1 group was higher than that in the C2 and C3 groups, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.01). The quality of life level of patients in the C2 group was higher than that in the C3 group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).
    Conclusion  Clinical staff should identify the characteristics of different types of patients, attach importance to patients with a potential profile of repeated experiences of severe stress disorder, and carry out necessary psychological intervention in a timely manner to improve the subsequent treatment effect and prognosis of patients.

     

/

返回文章
返回