The Study Of The Predictable Interventions To Prevent The Stroke Patients In The Community From Falling

Purpose:To investigate the status of fall of the stroke；to explore the difference offall of stroke through health education and the foressen intervention；To offerintervention for the survivals of stroke in the community.Methods：In this study，two of the heal the centers in Changchun were randomlyselected as intervention group and control group respectively. survivals ofstroke were selected in the study, the intervention group35,the control group33,according to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. There were three caseshad lost during the study. Finally the total of65to complete the task, in whichthe intervention group32,control group33.After getting the uniformtrainting,16investigators, who were divided into8groups,used the same scalewhich is named Fall Risk Assessment Scale to investigate the survivals ofstroke. The persons who were in the intervention group were given healtheducation and the foressen intervention for6months. Persons in control groupwere given health education only. The health education included pathogensis ofstroke, risk factors of fall of survivals of stroke, prevention measures and theself-help measures after fall. All people got aspect of health education twice amonth. Every seminar took25~30minutes. predictable intervention includeshouse hold hazardous environment improvement, medication guide, their ownproblems of management, reasonable dietary guidance, psychological guidance, exercise guidance and follow—up education. In this study, survivals of strokereceived health education3times,3aspects；intervention group receivedtraining in-home intervention12times, which was since the implementation ofinvtervention, once two months, other times were on-demand telephonefollow-up tutorial. Set up a database by EpiData3.02,Data was analyzed bySPSS17.0software used the methods as paired t test and two independentsamples t test. Compared two groups on Physiological dimension Pathologicaldimension, Biomechanics dimension, Psychological dimension, environmentdimension score respectively.Results:（1）During the study,32survivals of stroke in intervention group, whoseaverage age was70.75±9.60,33survivals of stroke were in control group, meanage71.18±8.67.Before the intervention, two groups of survivals of strokegeneral information had no statistical significance (P>0.05).(2)The baseline falls risk scores had no statistics significance (P>0.05)After6-month-intervention,the difference between the intervention group andthe control group on falls risk score was statistically significant(P<0.05).Before and after the intervention, intervention group had great significance (P<0.05)on falls risk scores, control group had great significance (P<0.05).(3)The baseline Physiological dimension scores had no statisticalsignificance(P>0.05). After6-month-intervention, the difference between theintervention group and the control group on Physiological dimension scoreswas statistically significant(P<0.05).Before and after the intervention,intervention group had great significance(P<0.05) on Physiological dimensionscores, control group had no significance (P>0.05).(4)The baseline Pathological dimension scores had no statisticalsignificance(P>0.05).After6-month-intervention, the difference between theintervention group and the control group on Pathological dimension scores was statistically significant(P<0.05).Before and after the intervention, interventiongroup had great significance(P<0.05)on Pathological dimension scores,controlgroup had no significance (P>0.05).(5)The baseline Biomechanics dimension scores had no statisticalsignificance(P>0.05).After6-month-intervention the difference between theintervention group and the control group on Biomechanics dimension scoreswas no significant(P>0.05).Before and after the intervention, interventiongroup had great significance(P<0.05)on Biomechanics dimension scores,control group had no significance(P>0.05).(6)The baseline Psychological dimension scores had no statisticalsignificance (P>0.05).After6-month-intervention, the difference between theintervention group and the control group on Psychological dimension had greatsignificance (P<0.05).Before and after the intervention, intervention group hadgreat significance(P<0.05)on Psychological dimension scores, control grouphad great significance (P<0.05).(7)The baseline Environment dimension scores had no statisticalsignificance(P>0.05).After6-month-intervention,the difference between theintervention group and the control group on Environment dimension scores wasstatistically significant (p<0.05).Before and after the intervention, interventiongroup had great significance(P<0.05)on Environment dimension scores, controlgroup had no significance(P>0.05).(8)The baseline on the numbers of fall had no statistical significance(P>0.05).After6-month-intervention,the difference between the interventiongroup and the control group on the numbers of fall had great statisticalsignificance(P<0.05). Conclusions:(1)The survivals of stroke with high risk for falls.(2)The predicatable intervention have a positive effect on the survivals ofstroke of Physiological dimension scores and Pathological dimension scoresand Biomechanics dimension scores and Psychological dimension scores andEnvironment dimension scores.(3) The predicatable intervention effectively reduce the risk of falling ofthe survivals of stroke.