|
Objective To understand the conservative treatment of hospitalized patients with ectopic pregnancy anxiety, depression status quo; explore the conservative treatment of hospitalized patients with ectopic pregnancy anxiety factors; research progressive muscle relaxation training (PMR) for conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy status of hospitalized patients with anxiety, self-efficacy , subjective well-being, social support, sleep, pain affected. Methods This study is experimental studies. Select from November 2009 to July 2010 Hospital of Hainan Province, Haikou City People's Hospital of Hainan Provincial People's Hospital of conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy, 90 cases of hospitalized patients as experimental subjects, randomly assigned into the group after the experimental group and the control group 45 cases. End of the study, to collect valid cases 80 cases, 39 cases of the experimental group and control group 41 cases. Experimental group during hospitalization in addition to routine care otherwise progressive muscle relaxation therapy, twice a day, 30 minutes each time, until discharge; control group received routine care. In the pre-intervention and post-intervention were selected states - Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS), visual analog scale ( VAS), touching the face of subjective well-being Scale (Index of Well-Being) of the two groups of patients with anxiety, self-efficacy, social support, sleep, pain, and subjective well-being assessed, analyzed progressive muscle relaxation training effect, and were recorded on admission and at discharge p-HCG values ??and the B-show mass diameter. Results 1. Admission in patients with conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy when state anxiety (S-AI) levels (50.21 ± 3.75): moderate anxiety accounted for 31.2% of patients, severe anxiety patients accounted for 447.5%. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that marriage, reproductive history, with or without children, economic conditions affecting the anxiety factor. 2 paired t-test showed that the experimental group before and after intervention was statistically significant decline in anxiety (t = 22.99, P lt; 0.05). Anxiety eased the control group, but the decline is lower. Using two-sample t-test analysis showed that ten prognostic groups were statistically significant differences in anxiety scores (t = 9.75, P lt; 0.05). 3 paired t-test showed that the experimental group after the intervention compared with self-efficacy score before the intervention, the difference was statistically significant (t = -44.75, P lt; 0.05); using two-sample t-test method, respectively, of the two groups the patient's self-efficacy difference (before intervention - intervention) were compared between groups, the results showed the two groups after intervention self-efficacy difference was statistically significant (t = 9.29, P lt; 0.05). 4 Wilcoxon test was used in Wilconox sign-rank method was used in both groups before and after intervention SWB scores are compared, the results showed the two groups before and after intervention SWB score differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.05), but After the intervention the experimental group scored significantly higher SWB scores before the intervention. Using non-parametric statistics (non-parametric statistics) in the Mann-Whitney U test method was used for the pre-intervention and post-intervention groups were compared SWB scores showed that the experimental group before the intervention and control group patients without subjective well-being score statistically significant (Z = -0.48, P gt; 0.05), subjective well-being after the intervention groups was statistically significant difference in scores (Z = -4.02, P lt; 0.05). 5 paired t-test showed that the experimental group after the intervention in addition to objective support, the total score of social support, subjective support, utilization of support score than before the intervention, the difference was statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). Using two-sample t-test method, the two groups of patients overall social support score difference, the difference subjective support, objective support score difference, utilization of support score difference (℡ before intervention after intervention) were compared between groups The results showed that the two groups after the intervention in addition to objective support score difference was not statistically significant (t = a 1.75, P gt; 0.05), the total social support, subjective support, utilization of support score differences were statistically significant (P lt ; 0.05) 6. Wilcoxon test was used in Wilconox sign-rank method was used in both groups before and after intervention pain, insomnia scores, the results showed the two groups before and after intervention pain score differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.05), However, the experimental group after the intervention pain score was significantly lower than pre-intervention scores. Insomnia scores before and after intervention control group showed no significant difference (Z = -1.544, P gt; 0.05), the experimental group before and after intervention insomnia score difference was statistically significant (Z = -4.28, P lt; 0.05). Using non-parametric statistics (non-parametric statistics) in the Mann-Whitney U test, respectively, before and after the intervention of the intervention patients were pain, insomnia scores compare experimental results showed that before the intervention and control groups were pain, insomnia scores were not statistically significant (P gt; 0.05), the two groups after intervention pain, insomnia score difference was statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). 7 covariance analysis showed that the experimental group of ten prognostic state anxiety score, pain score, insomnia score differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.001). On self-efficacy, subjective well-being, social support, repeated measures analysis of variance showed that five main effects observed indicators intervention were different (P lt; 0.05), which does not consider the time factor, the different intervention levels of self-efficacy , subjective well-being, the total social support, subjective support, support utilization differences; except objective support outside the five main effect of time observed indicators are different (P lt; 0.05), which does not consider the factors that interfere with self-efficacy , subjective well-being, the total social support, subjective support, support utilization changes over time; besides objective support, the other five indicators of the time there was an interaction between the factors and intervention (P lt; 0.05), Description In the first measurement and the second measurement, the experimental group and the control group self-efficacy, subjective well-being, the total social support, subjective support, support utilization rate of change over time and different. Further to do contour interaction diagram, graphics intervention, changes over time, self-efficacy, subjective well-being, the total social support, subjective support, support utilization score was significantly higher. Conclusions 1. Conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy patients on admission status anxiety levels, moderate anxiety were 31.2%, 47.5% severe anxiety. Marriage, reproductive history, with or without children, economic status of the patient anxiety factor. 2.PMR training on the conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy in patients with anxiety have a certain role in mitigation. 3.PMR training can effectively improve the patient's general self-efficacy, subjective well-being, the total social support, subjective support and support utilization conditions. 4.PMR training can effectively relieve pain and improve sleep.
|