不同干预模式对小儿哮喘管理的效果观察

目的：探讨不同干预模式在哮喘患儿管理中的效果。方法：将75例8-14岁哮喘患儿随机分为对照组、自我管理行为干预组（干预组A）、居家护理行为干预组（干预组B）各25例。对照组护理干预实施常规健康教育;干预组A在对照组的基础上实施自我护理行为干预即对哮喘患儿进行集体教育、个体指导、心理干预;干预组B在对照组的基础上实施居家护理行为干预（指导家长护理）。干预时间均为6个月,干预后进行效果评估。结果：干预后,哮喘控制水平均提高,干预组B与对照组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;干预组A、干预组B分别与对照组比较,肺功能改善更明显,急诊次数与缺课次数均减少,差异均有统计学意义（P均〈0.05）,而干预组A与干预组B比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论：自我管理行为干预和居家护理行为干预均能有效改善哮喘患儿症状,提高哮喘疗效,对哮喘患儿护理具有积极的临床意义。

Effect Observation of Different Intervention Models Used in the Management of Children with Asthma

Objective： To explore the effect of different intervention models in management in children with asthma. Methods： The75 cases of 8 - 14 years old children with asthma were divided into control group,self management intervention group（ group A） and home nursing intervention group（ group B）. The control group received the routine health education. Based on the routine health education,the group A was given self-care behavior intervention,including collective education of children with asthma,individual guidance,psychological intervention. Based on the routine health education,the group B was given home care behavioral intervention.Intervention time continue for half a year,then evaluate the effect after the intervention. Results： After the intervention,asthma control levels are raised,the differences were statistically significant between group B and control group（ P〈0. 05）; The pulmonary function improvement,the emergency number and absence times of group A and B were better than those of control group（ P〈0. 05）. The differences between group A and group B were no statistically significant（ P〉0. 05）. Conclusions： Self management behavior intervention and home nursing intervention can effectively improve symptoms in children with asthma,it can improve the curative effect of asthma,and have clinical value in children with asthma