切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志 ›› 2012, Vol. 01 ›› Issue (02) : 103 -108. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3232.2012.02.008

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

肝移植术后患者的生存质量及其影响因素研究
廖苑1, 周英2, 曾丽珍1, 叶海丹1, 郝元涛3,(), 王东平1, 房小翠4   
  1. 1. 510080 广州,中山大学附属第一医院器官移植科
    2. 广州医学院护理学院
    3. 中山大学公共卫生学院
    4. 中山大学附属第三医院肝移植科
  • 收稿日期:2012-07-24 出版日期:2012-10-10
  • 通信作者: 郝元涛
  • 基金资助:
    广东省科技计划项目(2011B061300031)

Quality of life following liver transplantation and its impact factors

Yuan LIAO1, Ying ZHOU2, Li-zhen ZENG1, Hai-dan YE1, Yuan-tao HAO3,(), Dong-ping WANG1, Xiao-cui FANG4   

  1. 1. Organ Transplantation Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China
  • Received:2012-07-24 Published:2012-10-10
  • Corresponding author: Yuan-tao HAO
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: HAO Yuan-tao, Email:
引用本文:

廖苑, 周英, 曾丽珍, 叶海丹, 郝元涛, 王东平, 房小翠. 肝移植术后患者的生存质量及其影响因素研究[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2012, 01(02): 103-108.

Yuan LIAO, Ying ZHOU, Li-zhen ZENG, Hai-dan YE, Yuan-tao HAO, Dong-ping WANG, Xiao-cui FANG. Quality of life following liver transplantation and its impact factors[J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2012, 01(02): 103-108.

目的

探讨肝移植术后患者的生存质量及其影响因素。

方法

2007年5月至2010年12月,根据自愿的原则,通过便利抽样调查,在中山大学附属第一医院和中山大学附属第三医院接受肝移植术2周以上的202例患者入选本研究。采用一般情况调查表、医学结局研究简短36条目问卷(SF-36)、抑郁自评量表(SDS)、焦虑自评量表(SAS)和社会支持评定量表的方法,对肝移植术后患者的生存质量及其影响因素进行回顾性研究。所有患者术前均签署知情同意书,符合医学伦理学规定。将患者分为5组,其中术后≤6个月者42例,术后7~12个月者40例,术后13~24个月者40例,术后25~36个月者40例、术后>3年者40例。计算各组患者SF-36中包括生理机能(PF)、生理职能(RP)、躯体疼痛(BP)、一般健康(GH)、精力(VT)、社会功能(SF)、情感职能(RE)、精神健康(MH)8个维度得分和生理健康总分(PCS)、精神健康总分(MCS)。采用Kruskal-Wallis检验比较各组生存质量的差异。分别以术后患者PCS总分和MCS总分为因变量,将客观支持分、主观支持分、支持利用度分、抑郁、焦虑、年龄、性别、婚姻状况、学历、术后时间(术后≤6个月、术后7~12个月、术后13~24个月、术后25~36个月、术后>3年者)、家庭月收入、原发病、医疗费用支付方式等可能的影响因素作为自变量分别纳入回归方程,采用逐步筛选(stepwise)法筛选变量,分析生存质量的影响因素。

结果

SF-36表中除RP、GH得分外,各组患者的其余6个维度得分及PCS、MCS比较,差异均有统计学意义(均为P<0.05)。与术后≤6个月患者比较,术后13~24个月组和术后>3年组的PCS和MCS显著升高,比较差异有统计学意义(Z值分别为3.103、2.233和2.859、2.551,均为P<0.05)。主观支持和术后时间为生理健康影响因素,主观支持分高和术后13~24个月及术后>3年的患者的生理健康水平较佳(t值分别为3.518、2.771、2.402,均为P<0.05)。术后时间、抑郁和焦虑为术后患者精神健康的影响因素。术后13~24个月及术后>3年的患者的精神健康水平较佳(t值分别为2.385、2.479,P<0.05),轻度抑郁、中度抑郁、中重度焦虑患者精神健康水平较差(t值分别为-2.141、-2.517、-2.071,均为P<0.05)。

结论

肝移植术后13~24个月和>3年患者的生存质量优于1年以内患者。主观支持和术后时间为患者生理健康的影响因素,术后时间、抑郁和焦虑为精神健康的影响因素。

Objective

To study the quality of life and its impact factors in liver transplant recipients.

Methods

A total of 202 patients in the First Affiliated Hospital and the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University who had undergone liver transplantation for more than 2 weeks were voluntarily enrolled in this retrospective study by Convenience Sampling and the questionnaire surveys including general information questionaire, Medical outcomes study of 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), self-rating depression scale (SDS), self-rating anxiety scale(SAS) and social support rating scale were performed in each patient. This study was approved by local ethical committee and that the informed consent of all participating subjects was obtained. The participants were divided into 5 groups according to their postoperative period. There were 42 patients in the group of less than or equal to 6 months after transplantation and 40 patients respectively in the group of 6 to 12 months, 13 to 24 months, 25 to 36 months and more than 3 years after transplantation. The scores of 8 sub-scales in SF-36, physical function(PF), role limitation due to physical problem(RP), blood pain (BP), general health(GH), vitality(VT), social function(SF), role limitation due to emotional problem(RE), mental health(MH), and physical component summary(PCS), mental component summary(MCS) scores were calculated and the differences among 5 groups were tested by Kruskal-Wallis test. The PCS and MCS scores were the dependent variables and the scores of objective support, subjective support, social supports and uses (sub-scales of Social Support Rating Scale), depression, anxiety, age, gender, marital status, education, postoperative period, family income, primary disease, medical payment were included as independent varibles into subsequent multiple linear regression analysis to identify factors influencing the quality of the recipients’ life.

Results

Except RP and GH scores, there were significant differences of scores in other six scales and PCS, MCS scores among 5 groups (P<0.05). Compared to patients in the group of less than or equal to 6 months, the scores of PCS and MCS were significantly higher among the patients in the group of 13 to 24 months after transplantation and more than 3 years after transplantation (Z=3.103, 2.233 and Z=2.859, 2.551, all in P<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that subjective support and postoperative time were the influencing factors of patients’ physical health(t=3.518, 2.771, 2.402, all in P<0.05). Higher scores of subjective support of patients in the group of 13 to 24 months after transplantation and more than 3 years after transplantation had higher physical health scores. Postoperative time, depression and anxiety were the main influencing factors for patients’ mental health. Patients in the group of 13 to 24 months after transplantation and more than 3 years after transplantation had higher mental health scores (t=2.385, 2.479, all in P<0.05). Patients with mild, moderate depression, moderate and severe anxiety had lower mental health scores (t=-2.141, -2.517, -2.071, all in P<0.05).

Conclusions

The quality of life in patients who received liver transplantation for more than 1 year but less than 2 years and more than 3 years are better than those within 1 year. The subjective support and postoperative time are the factors influencing physical health, while the postoperative time, depression and anxiety are the main factors influencing mental health.

表1 各组肝移植术后患者医学结局研究简短36条目问卷得分情况(分,±s)
表2 202例肝移植患者术后生理健康的影响因素
表3 202例肝移植患者术后精神健康的影响因素
[1]
郑树森,施乾锋.终末期肝病的肝移植在我国的发展.继续医学教育, 2006, 20(9):35-37.
[2]
严律南.努力提高我国肝移植的临床效果.中华肝脏病杂志, 2006, 14(4):241-242.
[3]
谭建辉,吴小平,石英,等.肝移植患者术后生活质量影响因素研究.护理实践与研究, 2011, 8(21):150-151.
[4]
Ordin YS, Dicle A, Wellard S. Quality of life in recipients before and after liver transplantation in Turkey. Prog Transplant, 2011, 21(3):260-267.
[5]
Colonna JO 2nd, Brems JJ, Hiatt JR, et al. The quality of survival after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc,1988,20(Suppl 1):594-597.
[6]
王静,孔介彦.肝移植患者社会支持与生存质量相关性研究.中国护理管理, 2010, 10(8):58-60.
[7]
席淑华,陈律,孟虹,等.肝移植术后患者心理状态的调查分析.中国实用护理杂志, 2006, 22(4):63-65.
[8]
赖莉,李晓玲,罗艳丽.肝移植受者症状经历与生存质量的相关性研究.中华护理杂志, 2010, 45(5):397-400.
[9]
汪向东,王希林,马弘.心理卫生评定量表手册[M].北京:中国心理卫生杂志社, 1999.
[10]
肖水源,杨德森.社会支持对身心健康的影响.中国心理卫生杂志, 1987, 1(4):183-187.
[11]
陆敏强,蔡常洁,华学锋,等.肝移植术改善患者生存质量的初步研究.中国康复医学杂志, 2006, 21(8):703-705.
[12]
杨永红,王惠珍,曾国兵.社会支持对肝移植患者生存质量的影响.中国实用护理杂志, 2006, 22(5):61-62.
[13]
黄丽华,张赛君,温燕玲,等.肝移植患者生活质量及相关因素的调查与分析.中华护理杂志, 2006, 41(7):589-593.
[14]
姚璐,周宇彤,汪涛,等.腹膜透析患者抑郁水平与生活质量的相关性分析.中华护理杂志, 2005, 40(6):473-474.
[15]
赖莉,罗艳丽,李晓玲.肝移植受者生存质量及其影响因素研究.华西医学, 2008, 23(5):1123-1125.
[16]
Telles-Correia D, Barbosa A, Mega I, et al. Mental health and quality of life in alcoholic liver disease patients after liver transplantation: a prospective controlled study. Transplant Proc,2011, 43(1):184-186.
[17]
Guimaro MS, Lacerda SS, Aguilar MR, et al. Post-traumatic stress disorders, mood disorders, and quality of life in transplant recipients with acute liver failure. Transplant Proc, 2011, 43(1):187-188.
[18]
Devine KA, Reed-Knight B, Loiselle KA, et al. Predictors of long-term health-related quality of life in adolescent solid organ transplant recipients. J Pediatr Psychol, 2011, 36(8):891-901.
[19]
Cowling T, Jennings LW, Goldstein RM, et al. Liver transplantation and health-related quality of life: scoring differences between men and women. Liver Transpl, 2004, 10(1):88-96.
[1] 李坤河, 寇萌佳, 邝立挺. 肝移植术后二次气管插管的危险因素及预测模型的建立[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 366-371.
[2] 中华医学会器官移植学分会, 中国医师协会器官移植医师分会, 上海医药行业协会. 中国肝、肾移植受者霉酚酸类药物应用专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 257-272.
[3] 陆闻青, 陈昕怡, 任雪飞. 遗传代谢病儿童肝移植受者术后生活质量调查研究[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 287-292.
[4] 范铁艳, 李君, 陈虹. 肝移植术后新发戊型病毒性肝炎的诊治经验[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 293-296.
[5] 陈朔, 陈峰, 程飞, 项捷. 糖原累积病Ⅰ型并发胰腺炎肝移植术后胰腺梗死一例[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 300-302.
[6] 汤鹏昊, 张武. 肠道微生态与肝移植围手术期并发症相关研究进展[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 303-307.
[7] 戴玮, 江桂林, 车兆平, 张姣, 王星星, 赵海涛. 无缝手术护理在腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术围手术期的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 778-781.
[8] 严庆, 刘颖, 邓斐文, 陈焕伟. 微血管侵犯对肝癌肝移植患者生存预后的影响[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 624-629.
[9] 廖梅, 张红君, 金洁玚, 吕艳, 任杰. 床旁超声造影对肝移植术后早期肝动脉血栓的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 630-634.
[10] 李秉林, 吕少诚, 潘飞, 姜涛, 樊华, 寇建涛, 贺强, 郎韧. 供肝灌注液病原菌与肝移植术后早期感染的相关性分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 656-660.
[11] 吕垒, 冯啸, 何凯明, 曾凯宁, 杨卿, 吕海金, 易慧敏, 易述红, 杨扬, 傅斌生. 改良金氏评分在儿童肝豆状核变性急性肝衰竭肝移植手术时机评估中价值并文献复习[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 661-668.
[12] 王孟龙. 肿瘤生物学特征在肝癌肝移植治疗中的意义[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 490-494.
[13] 王晓东, 汪恺, 葛昭, 丁忠祥, 徐骁. 计算机视觉技术在肝癌肝移植疗效提升中的研究进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 361-366.
[14] 付强, 秦丽媛, 李全波. 神经病理性疼痛患者血清miR-15a水平及意义分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 293-298.
[15] 潘惠, 王明, 杨忠, 杜向东. 低频重复经颅磁刺激辅助治疗伴不同特征抑郁症的对照研究[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 562-568.
阅读次数
全文


摘要