The Relationship And Influence Of Nutritional Risk、coping Modes And Quality Of Life On AMI With DM Patients

Objectives To explore the relationship and influence between nutritional risk status,coping mode and quality of life during acute myocardial infarction(AMI) with diabetes mellitus(DM) Inpatients. To provide the basis for development of measures to improve the quality of life of patients.Methods The 436 acute myocardial infarction(AMI) complicated with diabetes mellitus(DM) patients were collected as the research subjects, all of them were in Cang Zhou People Hospital and Ren Qiu People Hospital during Oct 2014 to Sep 2015.Using nutritional risk screening 2002(NRS2002), medical coping modes questionnaire(MCMQ), myocardial infarction dimensional assessment scale(MIDAS),social support rating scale(SSRS), hospital anxiety and depression scale(HADS) and Chinese perceived stress scale(CPSS) to track and measure the nutritional status,psychological status, social support and quality of life of the research subjects, also document the patients’ demographic and social data and disease related clinical data. Using T test, analysis of variance compared the difference between the different factors in the quality of life. Application of Pearson correlation analysis, analyze the relationship between nutritional risk, coping mode and quality of life. Application of multiple linear regression analysis, this paper discussed the influence of different factors on the quality of life, and path analysis on the influence factors of life quality.Results 1 Among all the 436 patients, there were 171 patients with nutritional risk which took up 39.2% and 80 patients with yield coping mode which took up 18.3%. 2 Effects of nutritional risk on quality of life: With nutritional risk patients life quality score was higher,showed that the poor quality of life. 3 The impact of coping modes on the quality of life: In the face, yield, avoid three dimension scores had differences, which face had the lowest score, yield had the highest score, avoid scoring center, showed that the quality of life of patients using the face of the way was best, the yield of the worst(P<0.05). 4 The nutritional risk and quality of life were positively correlated(r=0.731,P<0.01), the yield and quality of life were positively correlated(r=0.581, P<0.01). 5 The analysis results of factors affect quality of life: 1) Single factoe analysis:(1) The impact of general conditions on the quality of life: Age, education levels, average personal monthly household income,treatment modality and the first onset all affect the quality of life, the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).(2)The influence of social support on the quality of life:Medium level of support was lower than the high level of social support, the difference was statistically significant.(3)The influence of anxiety on quality of life: The patients got higher quality of life score with anxiety, which meat the patients with anxiety suffer poor quality of life(P<0.05).(4) The influence of depression on quality of life: the patients without depression got lower quality of life score than the ones who were with depression,which meat the patients with depression suffer poor quality of life(P<0.05).(5) Effect of stress on the quality of life: The patients with healty risk stress got higher quality of life score, which meat the patients with healty risk stress suffer poor quality of life(P<0.05). 2) Multivariate linear regression analysis: the main influencing factors were stress, anxiety, nutritional risk, yield of coping modes, depression and social support, that was the patients with stress, deep anxiety, high level of nutritional risk, the more yield coping mode, heavy depression degree, less social support, the patient are suffered worse quality of life. 3) Path analysis results: stress, anxiety, nutritional risk and social support affected the patients’ quality of life both directly and indirectly, while depression and yield of coping modes affected the quality of life directly.Conclusions 1 AMI with DM patients had a greater incidence of nutritional risk, up to39.2%. Nutrional risk, yield coping mode were positively correlated with quality of life, 2The main factors affect patients’ quality of life were: stress, anxiety, nutritional risk, yield of coping modes, depression and social support. 3 The result of path analysis was that the stress, anxiety, nutritional risk and social support affect the patients’ quality of life both directly and indirectly, while depression and yield of coping modes affected the quality of life directly.