摘要
目的比较负压封闭引流技术(VSD)和传统换药方法治疗脊柱术后皮下积液的临床疗效。方法 2009年6月至2011年6月,该科共治疗脊柱手术后皮下积液52例,分为A组26例(VSD治疗)和B组26例(传统换药)。比较两组患者的治愈率、切口愈合时间、并发感染率及满意度。结果所有治愈病例随访3个月无1例复发。A组治愈率为92.31%(24/26),与B组(69.23%,18/26)比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组切口愈合时间为(12.13±1.39)d,与B组(17.72±1.78)d比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组并发感染率为11.54%(3/26),与B组(34.62%,9/26)比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组满意率为84.62%(22/26),与B组(61.54%,15/26)比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 VSD治疗脊柱术后皮下积液临床疗效明显优于传统方法,具有患者痛苦少、满意度高、医务人员工作量少等优点。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of vacuum sealing drainage and traditional method on subcutaneous effusion after spinal operation.Methods From June 2009 to June 2011,52 cases were randomly divided into 2 groups：group A（treat with vacuum sealing drainage）and group B（treat with traditional method）.Comparing the cure rate,wound healing time,infection rete and satisfaction rate between two groups.Results All cured cases were followed up for 3 months,all wounds achieved primary healing postoperatively,and without recurrence.The cure rate was 92.31%（24/26）in group A,there was statistically significant difference compared with group B[69.23%（18/26）]（χ2=4.457,P〈0.05）.The wound healing time was（12.13±1.39）d in group A,and（17.72±1.78）d in group B,which showed statistically significant difference between two groups（t=11.455,P〈0.05）. The satisfaction rate was 84.62%（22/26）in group A,and 61.54%（15/26）in group B,which showed statistically significant difference between two groups（χ2=4.457,P〈0.05）.Conclusion The clinical effects of vacuum sealing drainage on subcutaneous effusion after spinal operation was obviously superior to traditional method,and vacuum sealing drainage has advantages such as less pain,more satisfaction in patients and less workload in medical staff.
出处
《重庆医学》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2013年第35期4277-4278,共2页
Chongqing medicine
关键词
脊柱损伤
皮下积液
负压伤口疗法
对比研究
spinal injuries
subcutaneous effusion
negative-pressure wound therapy
comp study
