Applied nursing research : ANR · 2015
Activities of daily living for patients with chronic heart failure: a partnership care model evaluation.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mohammadi Eesa, Khoshab Hadi, Kazemnejad Anoshirvan
Аннотация
AIM: The study determined the effect of a partnership care model (PCM) on the activities of daily living (ADL) of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).
BACKGROUND: Management programs for patients with CHF are needed to optimize care.
METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was designed in 2011 in four wards at two Iranian hospital centers with the participation of 104 patients with CHF who had hospitalization histories. The Lawton questionnaire was used to measure the dependent variable (ADL) at baseline after 3 months.
RESULTS: The mean difference (pre- and post-intervention) of the scores for the control (MD=0.06; SD=1.5) and experimental (MD=-2.3; SD=1.4) groups were calculated. T-test results showed that there was a significant difference in the means (p<0.05) between groups. The effect size (2.18) and standardized effect size (54.5) were also calculated.
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that centered ADL intervention based on a PCM improved the ADL of patients substantially more than other interventions.
BACKGROUND: Management programs for patients with CHF are needed to optimize care.
METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was designed in 2011 in four wards at two Iranian hospital centers with the participation of 104 patients with CHF who had hospitalization histories. The Lawton questionnaire was used to measure the dependent variable (ADL) at baseline after 3 months.
RESULTS: The mean difference (pre- and post-intervention) of the scores for the control (MD=0.06; SD=1.5) and experimental (MD=-2.3; SD=1.4) groups were calculated. T-test results showed that there was a significant difference in the means (p<0.05) between groups. The effect size (2.18) and standardized effect size (54.5) were also calculated.
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that centered ADL intervention based on a PCM improved the ADL of patients substantially more than other interventions.