BackgroundIn China, the problems of population aging and empty nesting have become important issues which will affect the social stability and economic development. The aim of this study was to explore the health promoting lifestyles and influencing factors among empty nesters and compare with non-empty nesters to find out their differences, so as to provide a scientific evidence for people to formulate health management strategies for elderly.MethodsA cross-sectional survey which used a stratified random cluster sampling method, was conducted among 500 elders in six districts of Taiyuan, China, there were 288 empty nesters and 212 non-empty nesters. The general information and health- promoting lifestyles were investigated by using the self-made General Information Questionnaire and Health Promoting Lifestyle Scale(HPLP). Two-sample t-test and Chi-square test were used to compare the sociodemographic factors, HPLP scores of empty nesters to non-empty nesters; Multiple stepwise linear regression was performed to estimate influencing factors related to the HPLP of empty nesters and non-empty nesters.ResultsThe current findings showed that there were differences between the empty nesters and non-empty nesters in gender, resident, marital status, education and income, self-care ability, source of income, relationship with spouse and social activities (P < 0.05). Empty nesters were mostly male, married, had a higher education level, self-care ability and income and lived in urban compared with non-empty nesters. The health promoting lifestyles of the elderly in this survey were in the medium level, the highest score for all dimensions in both groups was in nutrition, whereas health responsibility was executed worst. The HPLP and six subscales scores of the empty nesters were higher than non-empty nesters, there were significant differences in total score of HPLP, self-realization and health responsibility (P < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis showed that the main predictive factors for the empty nesters were education, self-care ability and resident, whereas the main predictive factors for the non-empty nesters were parents-child relationship, source of income and age; social activity was the common factor for two group.ConclusionThe health promoting lifestyles of the empty nesters was better than that of the non-empty nesters. Health responsibility, interpersonal relations and stress management were key dimensions to be improved. Except social activity, education, self-care ability and resident were the unique influencing factors of health-promoting lifestyles for empty nesters, while the parents-child relationship, income and age were unique factors for non-empty nesters. The main target of Intervention strategy for elderly health promoting lifestyles should be the enhance of health responsibility, interpersonal relations and stress management by improving social activities, parent-child relationship, education and income of elderly.
Background: Since the outbreak of coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have immediately carried out clinical research scheme of the COVID-19. But, there is still a lack of systematic review of registered clinical trials. Therefore, we made the first systematic review of the clinical trials of COVID-19 in order to provide evidence for the control of the COVID-19. Methods: The database from the Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to collect the registered clinical trials of COVID-19. The retrieval inception date is February 9, 2020. Two evaluators independently selected literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias. This study is based on the recommendations of PRISMA in Cochrane handbook. Results: A total of 75 COVID-19 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) were obtained. 97.3% of clinical trials were initiated by Chinese organizations. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and all registered clinical trials have not been completed. Most of the trials are early clinical exploratory trials or in pre-experiment stage (only two trials of Remdesivir in Ⅲ stage), and the sample size of subjects recruited is small. The main intervention methods include traditional Chinese medicine treatment, western medicine treatment and integrated Chinese and Western medicine treatment. The subjects were mainly non severe adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examination. The duration of most trials was more than 5 months, and the median of the intervention study was 180 d (95% CI: 146.3 -328.9 d); the median of the observation period was 334 d (95% CI: 166.6 -363.4 d). Overall, both the methodology quality of intervention register trials and observational trials are low. Conclusions: Disorderly and intensive clinical trialsof COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be carried out in China. However, based on the poor quality and small sample size and long completion period, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence about COVID-19 treatment for quite a long time in the future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for the clinical trials of COVID-19 in China.
Advanced lung cancer is becoming a chronic disease threatening human life and health. Cachexia has been recognized as the most common problem associated with advanced lung cancer. Lung cancer‐induced cachexia seriously affects patients’ quality of life. The present article summarizes the pathogenesis of advanced lung cancer‐induced cachexia from three aspects: anorexia, cytokines, and energy and metabolic abnormalities. In addition, the present article proposes corresponding nursing measures based on cachexia pathogenesis to improve the quality of life and survival rate of cachectic patients with advanced lung cancer by combining continuously advancing treatment regimens and effective nursing. The present article also provides references for healthcare professionals when administering related treatments and nursing care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.