Objective To research the clinical effect of health education model in the guidance intervention of delivery women in the perinatal stage. Methods 88 cases of delivery women admitted and treated in our hospital were selected and randomly divided into two groups with 44 cases in each, both groups adopted the routine intervention model in the depart-ment of obstetrics, the control group adopted the guidance intervention on this basis, while the observation group adopted the healthy education model for guidance intervention, and the satisfactory degree of intervention model, awareness rate of prenatal diagnosis items and related knowledge and number of patients with uterine-incision delivery were compared be-tween the two groups. Results The satisfactory degree of intervention model in the department of obstetrics in the perinatal period in the observation group was obviously better than that in the control group, and the difference between the two groups was obvious(P<0.05), and the awareness rate of prenatal examination items and awareness rate of related knowledge were obviously higher than those in the control group, and the difference between groups was obvious (P<0.05), and the number of patients with uterine-incision delivery was obviously fewer than that in the control group, and the difference be-tween groups was obvious(P<0.05). Conclusion The application effect of health education model for guidance intervention of delivery women in the perinatal stage is very obvious.%目的：对应用健康教育模式对孕产妇在围产期阶段实施指导干预的临床效果进行研究。方法选择该院收治的孕产妇88例，随机分为对照组和观察组，平均每组44例。采用常规产科干预模式对对照组研究对象在围产期阶段实施指导干预；在常规产科干预基础上加用健康教育模式对观察组研究对象在围产期阶段实施指导干预。对比两组研究对象围产期阶段产科干预模式的满意度、产前检查项目及相关知识知晓率、接受剖宫产手术人数。结果观察组研究对象对围产期阶段产科干预模式的满意度明显优于对照组，组间数据比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；产前检查项目及相关知识知晓率明显高于对照组，组间数据比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；接受剖宫产手术人数明显少于对照组，组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论应用健康教育模式对孕产妇在围产期阶段实施指导干预的临床效果非常明显。
展开▼
