{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0351985559566787, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0105294825511432, 'mean_word_length': 5.481481481481482, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 7, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of Positive Psychological Intervention on Negative Psychology, Cognitive Function, Self-Acceptance and Disease Uncertainty in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease


 Objective: to analyze the influence of positive psychological intervention on negative psychology, cognitive function, self-acceptance and disease uncertainty in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Methods: 79 patients with Parkinson’s disease admitted to our hospital
 from July 2017 to December 2019 were collected for comparative treatment. According to the random number method, they were divided into observation group (40 cases) and control group (39 cases). The patients in the control group were given routine nursing methods. The patients in the observation
 group were given positive psychological intervention on the basis of the control group. After the interference, the patients in the two groups were given negative psychology (HAMD) and cognition Function (visuospatial and executive function, naming ability, attention and memory, language ability,
 abstract thinking, delayed memory, orientation ability, total score), self-acceptance (self-acceptance, self-score), disease uncertainty (uncertainty, complexity), ADL, family coping style average score (positive coping style, negative coping style) The differences were analyzed. Results:
 after intervention, the HAMD scores of the two groups were lower than that before intervention, and the above indexes of the observation group were significantly lower than that of the control group (P < 0.05). After intervention, the visual space and executive function, naming ability,
 attention and memory, language ability, abstract thinking, delayed memory, orientation ability and total scores of the two groups were significantly higher than those of the control group (P < 0.05). After intervention, the self-acceptance and self-score of the two groups were higher than
 before intervention, and the above indexes of the observation group were significantly higher than those of the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). After intervention, the scores of uncertainties and complexity in the two groups were lower than those
 before intervention, and the above indexes in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). After intervention, the ADL scores of the two groups were higher than that before intervention, and the above indexes of the observation group were significantly
 higher than those of the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). After intervention, the scores of positive coping style in the two groups were higher than those before intervention, and the above indexes in the observation group were significantly higher
 than those in the control group (P < 0.05), while the scores of negative coping style in the observation group were lower than those before intervention, and the above indexes in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group, with a statistically significant
 difference (P < 0.05). Conclusion: positive psychological intervention can reduce the level of depression, improve patients’ cognitive function, increase patients’ self-confidence, reduce their fear of disease and improve their living standrads.
