论文部分内容阅读
目的比较两种膳食健康教育方式在社区2型糖尿病管理中的应用效果,评价“食物快速估算手测量法”在社区糖尿病管理中的作用。方法 2015年6月—2016年6月采用立意抽样的方法,在舟山市定海区城区选择工作基础相似的2个卫生服务站,随机分成实验组(有效调查50人)和对照组(有效调查46人)。实验组应用“食物快速估算手测量法”进行膳食教育,对照组应用常规的方法进行膳食教育。采用问卷调查、体格检查和生化检查获得有关观察指标。结果干预后,相关知识总知晓率实验组和对照组有提高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),且实验组比对照组提高得更多,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。干预后对“自我执行糖尿病膳食治疗满意度”的满意率,2组均较干预前有所降低,但只有实验组差异有统计学意义。干预前,2组间的各项观察指标差异绝大多数无统计学意义。干预后各项监测指标中,实验组的BP、HDL-C达标率有所上升,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。对照组的LDL-C达标率有所上升,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。干预后各项监测指标的平均值,实验组的LDL-C、HDL-C指标值有所改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。对照组的腰围、Hb A1c、LDL-C、HDL-C指标值有所改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。但干预后2组间的监测指标达标率和平均值差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 “糖尿病食物快速估算手测量法”相比传统的膳食教育方法,提高相关知识的作用更加明显,但仅以常规的形式进行膳食教育,不会取得比传统的教育方式更好的效果,需进一步探索糖尿病患者膳食教育形式。
Objective To compare the effect of two dietary health education methods in the management of community type 2 diabetes mellitus and evaluate the role of rapid measurement of food in measurement of community diabetes management. Methods From June 2015 to June 2016, two health service stations with similar working basis were selected in the urban area of Dinghai District, Zhoushan City by means of deliberate sampling method, and randomly divided into experimental group (effective investigation 50) and control group (effective investigation 46 people). The experimental group used “food quick estimation hand measurement method” for dietary education, and the control group used conventional methods for dietary education. Using questionnaires, physical examination and biochemical tests to obtain the relevant indicators. Results After intervention, the total awareness rate of related knowledge increased in both experimental group and control group, with significant difference (P <0.05), and the experimental group increased more than the control group with statistically significant difference (P <0.01). After the intervention, the satisfaction rate of “self satisfaction with satisfaction of dietary treatment of diabetes ” was lower in both groups than before intervention, but only the difference in the experimental group was statistically significant. Before intervention, the vast majority of the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. Among the monitoring indicators after intervention, the compliance rates of BP and HDL-C in experimental group increased, with significant difference (P <0.05). The control group’s LDL-C compliance rate increased, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.01). After intervention, the average of all the monitoring indicators, the experimental group LDL-C, HDL-C index values improved, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.01). The waist circumference, Hb A1c, LDL-C and HDL-C index of the control group were improved, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.01). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups after the intervention (P> 0.05). Conclusion The rapid measurement of diabetes mellitus by hand measurement method is more obvious than the traditional method of dietary education, but it is not only better than the traditional method of education, but only the regular form of dietary education. , Need to further explore the form of dietary education in diabetic patients.