摘要
目的评价3种不同有氧运动方案对鼻咽癌(nasopharyngeal carcinoma,NPC)患者癌因性疲乏(cancer-related fatigue,CRF)的干预效果。方法选择2021年7月—2024年6月梧州市红十字会医院肿瘤放疗科鼻咽癌病区同步放化疗的180例NPC患者为研究对象,参考随机数字表法分为快走组、健康操组、联合组,各60例。快走组予以快走有氧运动方案;健康操组予以健康操有氧运动方案;联合组予以快走+健康操有氧运动方案。对比3组CRF评分[中文版癌症疲乏量表(cancer fatigue scale,CFS)评估]、症状评分(安德森症状评估量表评估)、生活质量评分[中文版欧洲癌症生命质量测定量表(European organization for research and treat-ment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30,EORTCQLQ-C30)]。结果干预第2周、干预第4周、干预第6周及放疗结束前,健康操组的CRF评分分别为(36.84±2.31)分、(30.89±2.40)分、(18.43±2.52)分和(14.48±1.42)分,快走组分别为(40.51±2.47)分、(35.73±2.68)分、(26.17±1.46)分和(20.25±2.33)分,联合组分别为(31.11±1.25)分、(26.14±1.32)分、(11.95±1.41)分和(8.02±0.25)分,健康操组和联合组CRF评分均低于快走组,且联合组低于健康操组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预第2周、干预第4周、干预第6周及放疗结束前,快走组的症状评分分别为(151.02±6.18)分(、122.26±6.21)分(、100.87±5.15)分和(89.26±4.13)分,健康操组分别为(134.97±6.25)分、(104.34±6.52)分、(87.25±6.12)分和(76.32±5.18)分,联合组分别为(115.63±6.12)分、(86.39±6.14)分、(55.19±6.24)分和(64.87±4.26)分,健康操组和联合组症状评分均低于快走组,且联合组低于健康操组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预第2周、干预第4周、干预第6周及放疗结束前,快走组的生活质量评分分别为(68.29±4.07)分、(73.91±4.14)分、(79.23±3.19)分和(86.35±2.10)分,健康操组分别为(74.08±4.14)分、(81.08±4.02)分、(87.25±3.11)分和(93.45±2.34)分,联合组分别为(81.25±3.10)分、(88.05±3.26)分、(95.28±2.27)分和(99.57±0.12)分,健康操组与联合组生活质量评分均高于快走组,且联合组高于健康操组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论快走+健康操有氧运动方案有助于缓解NPC患者CRF,改善其临床症状,并提升其生活质量。
Objective To evaluate the intervention effects of three different aerobic exercise programs on cancer-related fatigue(CRF)in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma(NPC).Methods A total of 180 NPC patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Ward,Department of Radiation Oncology,Wuzhou Red Cross Hospital,from July 2021 to June 2024 were included in the study.Patients were randomly assigned using a random number table into three groups:brisk walking group(n=60),health exercises group(n=60),and combined group(n=60).The brisk walking group performed a brisk walking aerobic exercise program,the health exercises group performed a health exercises aerobic exercise program,and the combined group performed a combined brisk walking and health exercises aerobic exercise program.The scores of CRF,symptoms,and quality of life among the three groups were compared using the Chinese version of the cancer fatigue scale(CFS),the M.D.Anderson symptom inventory,and the Chinese version of the European organization for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30(EORTC QLQ-C30)..Results At week 2,week 4,week 6 of intervention,and before the end of radiotherapy,the CRF scores of the health qigong group were(36.84±2.31)points,(30.89±2.40)points,(18.43±2.52)points,and(14.48±1.42)points,respectively;those of the brisk walking group were(40.51±2.47)points,(35.73±2.68)points,(26.17±1.46)points,and(20.25±2.33)points,respectively;and those of the combined group were(31.11±1.25)points,(26.14±1.32)points,(11.95±1.41)points,and(8.02±0.25)points,respectively.The CRF scores of the health qigong group and the combined group were both lower than that of the brisk walking group,and the score of the combined group was lower than that of the health qigong group,with statistically significant differences(P<0.05).During the same time points(week 2,week 4,week 6 of intervention,and before the end of radiotherapy),the symptom scores of the brisk walking group were(151.02±6.18)points,(122.26±6.21)points,(100.87±5.15)points,and(89.26±4.13)points,respectively;those of the health qigong group were(134.97±6.25)points,(104.34±6.52)points,(87.25±6.12)points,and(76.32±5.18)points,respectively;and those of the combined group were(115.63±6.12)points,(86.39±6.14)points,(55.19±6.24)points,and(64.87±4.26)points,respectively.The symptom scores of the health qigong group and the combined group were both lower than that of the brisk walking group,and the score of the combined group was lower than that of the health qigong group,with statistically significant differences(P<0.05).For the quality of life scores at the aforementioned time points,the brisk walking group had scores of(68.29±4.07)points,(73.91±4.14)points,(79.23±3.19)points,and(86.35±2.10)points,respectively;the health qigong group had scores of(74.08±4.14)points,(81.08±4.02)points,(87.25±3.11)points,and(93.45±2.34)points,respectively;and the combined group had scores of(81.25±3.10)points,(88.05±3.26)points,(95.28±2.27)points,and(99.57±0.12)points respectively.The quality of life scores of the health qigong group and the combined group were both higher than that of the brisk walking group,and the score of the combined group was higher than that of the health qigong group,with statistically significant differences(P<0.05).Conclusion The combined brisk walking and health exercises aerobic exercise program helps alleviate CRF in NPC patients,improve clinical symptoms,and enhance their quality of life.
作者
黎彩玲
陈永红
李冬梅
邓雪萍
邱燕
LI Cailing;CHEN Yonghong;LI Dongmei;DENG Xueping;QIU Yan(Department of Radiation Oncology,Wuzhou Red Cross Hospital,Wuzhou Guangxi 543002,China)
出处
《中国卫生标准管理》
2025年第14期106-110,共5页
China Health Standard Management
基金
广西壮族自治区卫生健康委员会自筹经费科研课题(Z20211391)。
关键词
癌因性疲乏
有氧运动
快走
健康操
鼻咽癌
生活质量
cancer-related fatigue
aerobic exercise
brisk walking
health exercises
nasopharyngeal carcinoma
quality of life
