| Literature DB >> 36032048 |
Yuke Chen1, Xiuping Huang1, Qingmei Lu2, Jian Lu3, Xiaoxiao Huang1, Yanni Luo1, Fengxing Huang4.
Abstract
Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on the clinical records of 148 children diagnosed with severe beta thalassemia who were admitted to our hospital between October 2018 and September 2021. The patients were separated into two groups, a control group and an intervention group, with 74 cases in each group, according to the various care approaches. The basic treatment regimen was given to all of the children: deferoxamine mesylate combined with deferiprone. During treatment, the control group received routine care, and the intervention group adopted the FCC model based on a mobile app. The quality of life scale for children and adolescents (QLSCA) score, the family assessment device (FAD) score, the exercise of self-care agency scale (ESCA) score, and the medication compliance scale score were compared between the two groups.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36032048 PMCID: PMC9410948 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4658709
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Bionics Biomech ISSN: 1176-2322 Impact factor: 1.664
General demographic characteristics of the patients at discharge for both groups (, n (%)).
| Group | Gender | Age (year) | Course of disease (year) | Body weight (kg) | Stage of iron overload degree | Serum ferritin ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | IIA | IIIA | IIIB | |||||
| Control group ( | 36 (48.65) | 38 (51.35) | 8.42 ± 1.09 | 3.45 ± 0.83 | 21.53 ± 9.20 | 20 (27.03) | 26 (35.14) | 28 (37.84) | 2552.15 ± 611.10 |
| Intervention group ( | 42 (56.76) | 32 (43.24) | 8.60 ± 1.37 | 3.21 ± 0.95 | 21.81 ± 8.30 | 23 (31.08) | 29 (39.19) | 22 (29.73) | 2528.35 ± 637.16 |
|
| 0.976 | 0.884 | 1.637 | 0.194 | -0.941 | 0.232 | |||
|
| 0.323 | 0.378 | 0.104 | 0.846 | 0.347 | 0.817 | |||
Score of QLSCA between the two groups (point, ).
| Time | Control group ( | Intervention group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | 78.75 ± 7.23 | 79.26 ± 6.73 | 0.444 | 0.658 |
| 12 weeks after intervention | 91.45 ± 12.25 | 98.49 ± 13.48 | 3.325 | 0.001 |
| 24 weeks after intervention | 100.19 ± 11.37 | 105.87 ± 10.52 | 3.154 | 0.002 |
Score of ESCA between the two groups (point, ).
| Time | Control group ( | Intervention group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | 89.26 ± 15.22 | 88.85 ± 14.69 | 0.167 | 0.868 |
| 12 weeks after intervention | 102.45 ± 12.56 | 116.39 ± 13.51 | 6.501 | <0.001 |
| 24 weeks after intervention | 118.35 ± 11.54 | 128.62 ± 10.28 | 5.716 | <0.001 |
Score of medication compliance scale between the two groups (point, ).
| Time | Control group ( | Intervention group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | 19.15 ± 2.24 | 18.87 ± 3.32 | 0.601 | 0.548 |
| 12 weeks after intervention | 21.58 ± 3.36 | 23.19 ± 3.47 | 2.867 | 0.005 |
| 24 weeks after intervention | 23.68 ± 2.55 | 25.27 ± 2.48 | 3.845 | <0.001 |
Figure 1Comparison of QLSCA score between the control and intervention groups. n = 74; ∗∗p < 0.01. ns: not significant.
Figure 2Comparison of ESCA score between the control and intervention groups. n = 74; ∗∗∗p < 0.001. ns: not significant.
Figure 3Comparison of medication compliance scale score between the control and intervention group. n = 74; ∗∗p < 0.01 and ∗∗∗p < 0.001. ns: not significant.
Score of FAD (total function) between the two groups (point, ).
| Time | Control group ( | Intervention group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | 2.95 ± 0.58 | 3.01 ± 0.62 | 0.608 | 0.544 |
| 12 weeks after intervention | 2.48 ± 0.32 | 2.25 ± 0.29 | 4.581 | <0.001 |
| 24 weeks after intervention | 2.21 ± 0.18 | 2.06 ± 0.13 | 5.811 | <0.001 |
Figure 4Comparison of FAD score (total function) between the control and intervention group. n = 74; ∗∗∗p < 0.001. ns: not significant.