›› 2009, Vol. 8 ›› Issue (11): 631-634.

• 血液净化中心管理与技术 • 上一篇    下一篇

乌鲁木齐市血液透析患者生存质量多中心调查

张 豫 宋红萍 杨文君 吴莉君 刘 健   

  1. 新疆医科大学第一附属医院肾病科;解放军第四七四医院;兰州军区总医院
  • 收稿日期:2009-03-26 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2009-11-12 发布日期:2009-11-12

Multi-center investigations on life quality in hemodialysis patients in Urumchi area

ZHANG Yu, SONG Hong-ping, YANG Wen-jun, WU Li-jun,LIU Jian   

  1. 1Department of Nephrology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumchi 830054, China; 2The 474 Hospital of People’s Liberation Army, Urumchi 830054, China; 3The Hospital of Lanzhou Military Army Group, Urumchi 830054, China
  • Received:2009-03-26 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2009-11-12 Published:2009-11-12

摘要:

【摘要】目的 了解乌鲁木齐市血液透析患者的生存质量情况及其影响因素,并为临床及相关部门提供更多有用的信息,,便于咨询指导。方法 采用多中心调查法,病例选自乌鲁木齐市三家大医院的血液透析中心,持续血液透析3个月以上自愿参加本研究的患者169例,询问患者的一般资料情况并使用SF-36生存质量量表问卷调查。结果 ①血液透析患者生存质量SF-36总体评分为:(50.10±20.87),; ②血液透析患者在躯体疼痛方面男性评分高于女性。汉族和少数民族血液透析患者在SF-36生存质量总分及各维度评分无差异。糖尿病肾病组血液透析患者在SF-36生存质量总分及多数维度评分低于非糖尿病组。有工作的血液透析患者生存质量在SF-36总分及多数维度评分均高于无工作者;③年龄与SF-36总分、生理机能、生理职能、精力等呈负相关,与情感职能、精神健康评分呈正相关;文化程度、工作状态主要与社会职能、精神健康方面呈正相关。;④影响乌鲁木齐市维持性血液透析患者SF-36生存质量得分的入选因素为:年龄、文化程度、工作状态、原发病。结论 乌鲁木齐市血液透析患者生存质量在多数方面低于欧美和日本,与国内广州、武汉的相当。多种因素影响维持性血液透析患者生存质量得分,提高血液透析患者的生存质量是一个多方面、多因素的问题,需要医疗、政府、社会保障等各个部门共同努力。

关键词: 血液透析 生存质量 SF-36评分

Abstract:

【Abstract】 Objective This study was designed to evaluate the life quality (LQ) and the factors affecting LQ in hemodialysis (HD) patients in Urumqi, and to provide useful information for clinical and other related services for counseling. Methods We recruited 169 HD patients from dialysis units in the 3 hospitals in Urumqi. Marital status, employment and recreational activities were questioned, and Quality of life scale in Short Form-36 (SF-36) was used to measure the health-related LQ. Results (a) The overall SF-36 scores were (50.10±20.87) in HD patients. (b) The body pain score was higher in males than in females. The overall score of LQ and other parameters by SF-36 were indifferent between Han and minority nationalities patients, but were lower in HD patients with diabetic nephropathy than those without diabetic nephropathy, as well as in jobless HD patients than those with employment. (c) Age of the patients was negatively correlated with the overall score by SF-36, physical functioning, physiological activity and vitality, but was positively correlated with emotional functioning and mental health. Education and employment were positively correlated with social status and mental health of the patients. (d) Factors affecting the LQ score by SF-36 included age, education employment, and diabetes. Conclusion The LQ scores in HD patients in Urumqi were comparable to those in patients in Guangzhou and Wuhan cities, but were inferior to those in HD patients in western countries and Japan. Many factors influence the LQ scores in HD patients. Subsequently, multidisciplinary efforts including medical management, services from government and social security department are indispensable to promote LQ in HD patients.

Key words: Quality of life, Short form-36 (SF-36)