| Objective: To investigate the effect of coronary heart disease health educationtool figure dialogue on health education for patients with coronary heart disease, andprovide a theoretical basis for health education.Methods:200patients with coronary heart disease were recruited from Octoberto December in2012in Shenyang hospital.100patients from ward1were selectedas control group, and100patients from ward2were selected as experiment group.The control group were educated in the form of oral education, dispensing healtheducation manual, launching lectures and other ways of health education. They weretracking intervened with phone call once a week since one month after discharge tillthe sixth month. The education of the experimental group was conducted withself-designed coronary heart disease (CHD) conversation map and card. They weregrouped for discussion with8-15patients per group. Nursing staff not only taughtthe patients with professional knowledge, but also lead them to discuss a certaintopic. This work was carried out once a week when hospitalized and persisted for sixmonths after discharge once a month. The data was collected using aself-designed questionnaire and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ), coronaryartery disease self-management behavior scale (CSMS), and WHOQOL-BREFquestionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF). Data was analyzed using SPSS19.0. Continuousvariables were presented with mean±standard deviation, and categorical variableswere presented with proportion. Comparison between groups was done using twoindependent-samples t test or chi-square test, and within groups comparison wasconducted using paired-samples t test. P<0.05was considered statisticallysignificant.Results:1．In the control group, five cases were lost in the tracking intervention, and in theexperimental group, four cases lost correspondingly. The remaining191patients were fully investigated. No statistically significant difference between the twogroups of patients in age, course of disease, blood glucose and body mass index wasfound (P>0.05), and the two groups were balanced.2.Before the investigation, the ability of the understanding between the two groupsof patients was not different, and no statistical difference in cognitive level of disease,treatment compliance, quality of life and self management ability between twogroups was found (P>0.05).3. After the health education, there existed difference between the experimentalgroup and the control group in treatment compliance (SAQ) with statisticalsignificance (P<0.05) by experimental group (77.39±3.24) higher than that of thecontrol group (66.61±3.20). Four out of five dimensions were significantly different.The scores of angina stability (79.53±6.72), anginal frequency (79.95±6.04),treatment satisfaction (80.30±5.40), and disease cognition (76.11±8.67) ofexperimental group were all higher than those of the control group (ngina stability:68.03±7.42; anginal frequency:67.78±7.64; treatment satisfaction:68.50±7.42;disease cognition:58.51±6.86).4. After the health education, there was statistical significance (P<0.05) between theexperimental group and the control group patients in self-management (CSMS) withexperimental group (78.89±7.55) higher than that of the control group (70.58±8.46).Six out of seven dimensions were significantly different. Scores of bad habitsmanagement (13.07±2.46), general life management (10.33±2.98), treatmentcompliance management (15.30±2.35), emergency management (12.97±2.61),knowledge of disease management (8.84±2.57), and cognitive emotion management(6.01±0.91) were all higher than those of the control group (bad habits management:12.20±2.87; general life management:7.88±3.27; treatment compliance management:13.77±3.09; emergency management:11.74±3.06; knowledge of diseasemanagement:7.69±2.76; cognitive emotion management:4.43±1.15).5. After the health education, the quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF) between the twogroups was statistically different (P<0.05) with experimental group (66.30±5.42) higher than that of the control group (60.19±5.47). Four dimensions were allsignificantly different.6. Before and after health education, the treatment compliance, self management,quality of life of the patients educated with experimental tools were statisticallydifferent (P<0.05).Conclusion:1. Conversation map tools for health education can significantly improve the qualityof life and body function for coronary heart disease patients. It can also improve thetreatment compliance of patients.2. Health education with conversation map tools for coronary heart disease patientscan improve their ability of self management.3. Conversation map tools for health education can improve the quality of life inpatients with coronary heart disease. |
PDF Full Text Request