摘要
目的探讨胸管拔除后最佳的引流管置管口封闭方法。方法采用随机双盲对照法对比分析胸管拔除后利用3M贴膜改良法(改良组,100例)与预留缝线法(预留缝线组,100例)封闭置管口的临床效果,观察操作时间、疼痛评分、拔管后并发症发生率等指标。结果改良组患者封闭置管口操作时间[(9.08±2.14)s]、疼痛评分[(1.21±0.67)分]均明显低于预留缝线组[分别为(12.1±2.4)s、(3.82±0.91)分],差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),患者舒适度更好。两组患者拔管后局部渗液、气胸等并发症发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论改良法封闭拔胸管后置管口操作时间短、患者舒适度更好,不增加并发症发生率,临床可常规使用该法封闭胸管拔除后置管口。
Objective To explore the optimal method for sealing closed thoracic drainage incision after chest tube extraction. Methods Randomized double-blind control was used to compare the clinical effects between the improving method of 3M TegadermTM HP and reserved suture method after chest tube extraction. The time of clinical procedures,pain score and postoperative complications rate were observed. Results The time of clinical procedures in the improving method group was significantly lower than that of reserved suture group(9.08±2.14s vs .12.1±2.4s, P <0.05);the pain score in the improving method group was significantly lower than that of the reserved suture group(1.21±0.67 vs .3.82±0.91, P <0.05).Patient comfort was better in the improving group. The incidence of local exudate and pneumothorax after chest tube extraction were not significantly different between the two groups( P >0.05). Conclusion The time of clinical procedures in the improving method group was shorter. The patients' comfort degree in the improving method group was higher. The incidence of complications was not significantly different between two groups,so the improving method can be routinely used to seal closed thoracic drainage incision after chest tube extraction.
作者
龚春霞
施博文
卢琪珏
李春光
GONG Chunxia;SHI Bowen;LU Qijue;LI Chunguang(Department of Thoracic Surgery,Changhai Hospital,The Second Military Medical University,Shanghai 200433,China;Department of Anesthesiology,Changhai Hospital,The Second Military Medical University,Shanghai 200433,China)
出处
《重庆医学》
CAS
2019年第A01期166-169,共4页
Chongqing medicine
关键词
改良法
预留缝线
胸腔闭式引流置管口
the improving method
reserved suture
closed thoracic drainage incision after chest tube extraction
