| 曹信宇,刘青,孟凡涛,王玲,商伟芳.不同治疗方式治疗内痔的效果及术后生活质量影响因素分析.[J].中南医学科学杂志.,2025,(6):1057-1060. |
| 不同治疗方式治疗内痔的效果及术后生活质量影响因素分析 |
| Analysis of treatment outcomes for internal hemorrhoids through different therapeutic approaches and factors affecting postoperative quality of life |
| 投稿时间：2024-09-22 修订日期：2025-02-20 |
| DOI：10.15972/j.cnki.43-1509/r.2025.06.029 |
| 中文关键词: 内痔 治疗方式 术后生活质量 影响因素 |
| 英文关键词:internal hemorrhoids treatment methods postoperative quality of life influencing factors |
| 基金项目:秦皇岛市科学技术研究与发展计划项目(202301A252) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 47 |
| 全文下载次数: 36 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的分析内痔不同治疗方式的效果及术后生活质量影响因素。 方法选择内痔患者194例,依据治疗方式不同分为观察组154例(泡沫硬化剂联合胶圈套扎术)和对照组40例(胶圈套扎术)。比较两组治疗效果、术后康复指标及并发症发生情况,另按照术后生活质量评分将所有研究对象分为生活质量良好组(156例)和生活质量差组(38例),以单因素及多因素回归分析生活质量影响因素。 结果观察组治疗有效率高于对照组(P＜0.05)。观察组术后住院时间、肛门水肿评分、疼痛评分和创面愈合时间均低于对照组,观察组生活质量评分高于对照组(P＜0.05)。观察组术后排便困难、出血和切口感染发生率均低于对照组(P＜0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,治疗方法、治疗有效率、病程、疼痛评分是患者术后生活质量的影响因素(P＜0.05)。 结论内痔康复疗效与治疗方式有关,泡沫硬化剂联合胶圈套扎术治疗优于单一治疗,且治疗方法、治疗有效率、病程和疼痛评分是患者生活质量的影响因素。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| AimTo analyze the efficacy differences of different treatment methods for internal hemorrhoids and the influen-cing factors of quality of life. MethodsA total of 194 patients with internal hemorrhoids were selected and divided into an observation group (n＝154) receiving foam sclerotherapy combined with ligation and a control group (n＝40) undergoing rubber band ligation. Treatment outcomes, postoperative recovery indicators, and complication rates were compared between groups. Additionally, all subjects were grouped into a poor QoL group (38 cases) and a good QoL group (156 cases) based on postoperative quality of life (QoL) scores. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to identify factors influencing QoL. ResultsThe treatment efficacy rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group (P＜0.05). The postoperative hospital stay length, anal edema score, pain score, and wound healing time were all lower in the observation group than in the control group. However, the postoperative quality of life score was higher in the observation group than in the control group. All these differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). The incidence of postoperative defecation difficulties, bleeding, and incisional infections was lower in the observation group than in the control group (P＜0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis revealed that treatment method, treatment efficacy rate, disease duration, and pain score were factors influencing postoperative quality of life (P＜0.05). ConclusionThe efficacy of internal hemorrhoid rehabilitation is related to treatment methods, with combined therapy superior to monotherapy. Treatment approach, response rate, disease duration, and pain scores are factors influencing patients' quality of life. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|