中国实用护理杂志
中國實用護理雜誌
중국실용호리잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF PRACTICAL NURSING
2011年
19期
8-10
,共3页
吴妙莉%黄慧%蓝宇涛%洪涛%许阳子%陈慈玉
吳妙莉%黃慧%藍宇濤%洪濤%許暘子%陳慈玉
오묘리%황혜%람우도%홍도%허양자%진자옥
舒康博G水凝胶敷料%舒康博H水胶体敷料%静脉炎%疼痛
舒康博G水凝膠敷料%舒康博H水膠體敷料%靜脈炎%疼痛
서강박G수응효부료%서강박H수효체부료%정맥염%동통
Suprasorb G%Suprasorb H%Phlebitis%Pain
目的 探讨2种湿性敷料用于Ⅱ级以上外周静脉炎的处理效果.方法 将64例2级或以上外周静脉炎患者随机分成观察组(36例)和对照组(28例).分别使用舒康博G水凝胶敷料和舒康博H水胶体敷料,在使用后4,24,48,72 h观察2组静脉炎分级、疼痛评分、红肿及条索样的变化.结果 2组处理前后自身对照,静脉炎分级、疼痛评分、红肿及条索样变化均有显著差异;组间比较静脉炎分级改变差异显著,红肿及条索样变化在48,72 h 2个时间点上差异显著,疼痛评分变化没有显著差异.结论 舒康博G水凝胶敷料和舒康博H水胶体敷料对静脉炎处理均有良好的效果;舒康博G水凝胶敷料在静脉炎程度改善方面优于舒康博H水胶体敷料;在静脉炎红肿范围的缩小及条索样消散方面,随着时间的推移,效果同样优于舒康博H水胶体敷料;但两者在缓解疼痛方面效果近似.
目的 探討2種濕性敷料用于Ⅱ級以上外週靜脈炎的處理效果.方法 將64例2級或以上外週靜脈炎患者隨機分成觀察組(36例)和對照組(28例).分彆使用舒康博G水凝膠敷料和舒康博H水膠體敷料,在使用後4,24,48,72 h觀察2組靜脈炎分級、疼痛評分、紅腫及條索樣的變化.結果 2組處理前後自身對照,靜脈炎分級、疼痛評分、紅腫及條索樣變化均有顯著差異;組間比較靜脈炎分級改變差異顯著,紅腫及條索樣變化在48,72 h 2箇時間點上差異顯著,疼痛評分變化沒有顯著差異.結論 舒康博G水凝膠敷料和舒康博H水膠體敷料對靜脈炎處理均有良好的效果;舒康博G水凝膠敷料在靜脈炎程度改善方麵優于舒康博H水膠體敷料;在靜脈炎紅腫範圍的縮小及條索樣消散方麵,隨著時間的推移,效果同樣優于舒康博H水膠體敷料;但兩者在緩解疼痛方麵效果近似.
목적 탐토2충습성부료용우Ⅱ급이상외주정맥염적처리효과.방법 장64례2급혹이상외주정맥염환자수궤분성관찰조(36례)화대조조(28례).분별사용서강박G수응효부료화서강박H수효체부료,재사용후4,24,48,72 h관찰2조정맥염분급、동통평분、홍종급조색양적변화.결과 2조처리전후자신대조,정맥염분급、동통평분、홍종급조색양변화균유현저차이;조간비교정맥염분급개변차이현저,홍종급조색양변화재48,72 h 2개시간점상차이현저,동통평분변화몰유현저차이.결론 서강박G수응효부료화서강박H수효체부료대정맥염처리균유량호적효과;서강박G수응효부료재정맥염정도개선방면우우서강박H수효체부료;재정맥염홍종범위적축소급조색양소산방면,수착시간적추이,효과동양우우서강박H수효체부료;단량자재완해동통방면효과근사.
Objective To observe the effects of Suprasorb G and Suprasorb H on peripheral phlebitis above stage Ⅱ. Methods 64 patients with peripheral phlebitis above Stage Ⅱ were randomly divided into the observation group (36 patients) and the control group (28 patients). The observation group used Suprasorb G, and the control group used Suprasorb H. All cases were tested with the change of stage of peripheral phlebitis, the pain score, the red swelling of the skin and the palpable vascular cord. Results After treatment with Suprasorb H or Suprasorb G, there were significant differences in the change of stage of peripheral phlebitis, red swelling of the skin, pain score and the change of palpable vascular cord by self-contrast before and after treatment. Significant differences existed in change of stage of peripheral phlebitis, and red swelling of the skin and the change of palpable vascular cord at 48 and 72 hours, but no change was seen in pain score between 2 groups. Conclusions Suprasorb G and Suprasorb H beth show good effect in treatment of peripheral phlebitis, but Suprasorb G is better than Suprasorb H in improving the stage of peripheral phlebitis, also in reducing the area of red swelling of the skin and the palpable vascular cord with passage of time. But there is no difference in releasing of pain caused by peripheral phlebitis between them.