前列腺癌根治术患者采用围术期康复干预对尿失禁的预防效果

目的分析前列腺癌根治术患者采用围术期康复干预对尿失禁的预防效果。方法 42例行前列腺癌根治术的患者,随机分为研究组与对照组,每组21例。对照组患者给予常规干预,研究组患者采取围术期康复干预。对比两组患者的尿失禁发生率,下尿路症状改善情况,生活质量。结果研究组患者的尿失禁发病率14.29%明显低于对照组的47.62%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者的下尿路症状评估量表(LUTS)评分均低于本组干预前,且研究组患者的LUTS评分(10.25±2.02)分明显低于对照组的(15.63±2.59)分,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组患者的生理功能、情感职能、社会功能、总体健康评分分别为(75.14±4.28)、(76.67±4.31)、(74.98±4.25)、(75.87±4.26)分,均高于对照组的67.21±4.35)、(68.22±4.39)、(66.58±4.37)、(68.01±4.36)分,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论前列腺癌根治术患者采用围术期康复干预可以有效降低术后并发症发生率,改善患者临床症状,提高患者生活质量,效果显著,值得在临床上进一步推广应用。     

胆囊结石合并胆总管结石术后患者复发情况及危险因素分析

目的 探讨胆囊结石合并胆总管结石(CBDS)术后患者复发情况及危险因素。方法 纳入114例2019年1月~2020年12月在本院行ECRP联合LC治疗的胆囊结石合并CBDS患者,回顾性分析其临床资料,根据所选患者ECRP联合LC术后随访1年内是否复发(REC)将其分为REC组(32例)和未REC组(82例)。回顾性统计胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC情况,比较REC组和未REC组的临床资料,并分析胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC的危险因素。结果 114例胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC32例,发生率28.07%。胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC的危险因素为胆道感染、胆道口括约肌切开、术者经验≤3年、胆道括约肌功能障碍(OR=4.170、4.047、3.568、3.367,P<0.05)。结论 胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC的危险因素与胆道感染、胆道口括约肌切开、术者经验≤3年、胆道括约肌功能障碍密切相关,可据此针对性制定临床治疗及护理干预措施方案,以降低胆囊结石合并CBDS术后患者REC率。     

早产儿早期神经运动干预研究进展

随着医疗救治水平的不断提高,早产儿的存活率明显增加,但早产常易伴发脑性瘫痪、运动和认知障碍等一系列神经发育问题,给家庭、社会带来沉重负担。生命早期大脑发育迅速,可塑性强,是进行早期运动干预的良好时机。本文就早产儿早期神经运动干预进行综述,旨在为临床医护人员对早产儿进行适宜有效的运动干预提供参考。     

Evaluating a Food Pantry–Based Intervention to Improve Food Security,Dietary Intake,and Quality in Midwestern Food Pantries

BackgroundVoices for Food was a longitudinal community, food pantry–based intervention informed by the social ecological model, and designed to improve food security, dietary intake, and quality among clients, which was carried out in 24 rural food pantries across 6 Midwestern states.ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate changes in adult food security, dietary intake, and quality from baseline (2014) to follow-up (2016), and to assess the role of adult food security on dietary outcomes.DesignA multistate, longitudinal, quasi-experimental intervention with matched treatment and comparison design was used to evaluate treatment vs comparison group changes over time and changes in both groups over time.Participants/settingAdult food pantry clients (n = 617) completed a demographic food security survey, and up to three 24-hour dietary recalls at baseline (n = 590) and follow-up (n = 160).InterventionCommunity coaching served as the experimental component, which only “treatment” communities received, and a food council guide and food pantry toolkit were provided to both “treatment” and matched “comparison” communities.Main outcome measuresChange in adult food security status, mean usual intakes of nutrients and food groups, and Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores were the main outcome measures.Statistical analyses performedLinear mixed models estimated changes in outcomes by intervention group and by adult food security status over time.ResultsImprovements in adult food security score (–0.7 ± 0.3; P = .01), Healthy Eating Index-2010 total score (4.2 ± 1.1; P < .0001), and empty calories component score (3.4 ± 0.5; P <.0001) from baseline to follow-up were observed in treatment and comparison groups, but no statistically significant changes were found for adult food security status, dietary quality, and usual intakes of nutrients and food groups between the 2 groups over time. The intervention effect on dietary quality and usual intake changes over time by adult food security status were also not observed.ConclusionsFood pantry clients in treatment and comparison groups had higher food security and dietary quality at the follow-up evaluation of the Voices for Food intervention trial compared with baseline, despite the lack of difference among the groups as a result of the experimental coaching component.