Objective To explore the influences of self-efficacy intervention on compliance and self efficacy of liver transplantation recipients during hospitalization.Methods A total of 64 liver transplantation recipients in liver transplantation center of 302 Military Hospital of China from October 1 st 201 2 to September 30th 201 4 were recruited and divided into intervention group (targeted measures to enhance self efficacy)and control group (routine nursing and health education)according to the serial number designed by sequence of operation.General information of patients was collected by transplantation registration system.Besides,self-efficacy level before operation,self-efficacy and compliance level at 1 ,6 months after operation was evaluated by questionnaire.And then,self-efficacy and compliance were compared between two groups.Results There were statistically significant differences in the score of self efficacy of patients between two groups at 1 st and 6th month (P <0.01 ).The scores of self-efficacy of patients in two groups before and after intervention were analyzed with repeated measurement analysis of variance.The results showed that it was an obvious difference between two groups.At the same time,there was a statistical difference between two groups with the time changing (P <0.05).The scores of compliance,self-monitoring nursing and life habits of patients in intervention group at 1 st and 6th month were higher than those in control group with significant differences (P <0.01 );however,there was no significant difference in medication compliance and scores of two sub-scales (P >0.05).Besides,there was no significant difference on whether complications occurred (P >0.05 ).Conclusions Self-efficacy intervention can enhance self-efficacy of liver transplantation recipients after operation,improve patients′ability of self-care,promote their health behavior and improve patients′compliance so as to improve the quality of life of patients after operation.

Objective To evaluate the preventive effects of predictive phased intervention on lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in ICU patients.Methods A total of 82 cases of critically ill patients admitted to our hospital from June 2013 to June 2016 were divided into observation group and control group according to the random number table method, with 41 cases respectively. Patients in the observation group received predictive phased intervention, while patients in the control group received routine nursing intervention. After 4 weeks of intervention, the lower extremity deep venous thrombosis rate, lower limb perimeter and blood flow velocity of lower extremity venous were compared between two groups.Results The incidence of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis was 2.44% in the observation group and 19.51% in the control group. The difference between two groups was statistically significant (x2=6.604,P<0.05). After the intervention, the lower limb perimeter of patients in the observation group was (30.01±2.34) cm, which was significantly lower than that of the control group; the venous blood flow velocity of the lower extremity of patients in the observation group was (25.43±3.01) cm/s, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (t=2.285, 2.357;P<0.05).Conclusions Predictive phased intervention has obvious advantages in the prevention of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in ICU patients and it is worth clinical promotion.