情志干预对不同系统疾病急诊患者心理健康影响疗效观察

目的：评价情志干预对不同系统疾病急诊患者心理状况的影响。方法：纳入2010年8月—2011年10月广东省中医院大学城急诊科就诊的患者400例,应用随机数字表法产生随机序列,随机分为常规护理组及情志干预组各200例。治疗前后使用SCL90、SDS、SAS量表评价并比较。结果：两组分别有36%和37.5%患者就诊时存在不同程度的焦虑和抑郁症状;情志干预组心血管、消化、呼吸、神经系统患者SAS、SDS、SCL-90总分显著低于常规组,情志干预组治疗后心血管疾病患者躯体化、强迫、抑郁、焦虑、精神病性5项因子,消化疾病躯体化、抑郁、焦虑、恐怖、偏执5项因子,呼吸疾病躯体化、强迫、人际敏感、抑郁、焦虑、恐怖、偏执7项因子,神经疾病躯体化、强迫、抑郁、焦虑、恐怖5项因子显著低于常规组,以上差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论：急诊患者就诊时多存在不良心理情绪,其表现与其所患疾病系统类别相关,通过情志干预能有针对性的改善不同系统疾病患者的不良情绪。

Curative Effect of Emotional Intervention for Treatment of Patients with Different Diseases in Emergency

Objective ： To investigate the effect of emotional intervention for treatment of patients with different diseases in emergency. Methods： Four hundred patients were randomly divided into routine care group and emotional intervention group by random number table. After treatment, the curative effect of the two groups was compared with SCL90, SDS, SAS scale. Results ： 36% patients had different degrees of anxiety and depression in routine care group and 37.5% patients in emotional intervention group. SAS, SDS and SCL-90 score were obviously reduced after treatment compared routine care group in cardiovascular, digestive, respiratory system and nervous system. Factors of somatization, force, depression, anxiety and psychotic disease in cardiovascular system, factors of somatization, depression, anxiety, terror, paranoid in digestive systme, factors of somatization, force, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, psychotic disease, terror and paranoid in respiratory system, and factors of somatization, force, depression, anxiety and terror in nervous system, were different between the two groups （ P〈0.05 ）. Conclusion ： Patients have psychological mood in emergency. Emotional intervention can relieve those psychological moods.