CAJ | 학술논문

目的评价改良的敷料绷带加压包扎方法处理经股动脉介入术后股动脉穿刺点的安全性及优越性。方法将648例经股动脉介入诊疗患者随机分为改良组224例、传统组21 3例和止血器组211例，3组分别采用改良的敷料绷带加压包扎法、传统的压迫止血加压包扎法和动脉压迫止血器止血法。观察3组的徒手压迫时间、止血费用、制动时间及并发症的发生情况。结果 3组在制动时间及局部血管并发症的发生率方面比较无显著差异；改良组和止血器组较传统组减少了徒手压迫时间，传统组和改良组较止血器组降低了患者的止血费用。结论改良的敷料绷带加压包扎方法减少了徒手压迫时间，同时降低了患者的止血费用，值得临床推广。
목적 평개개량적부료붕대가압포찰방법처리경고동맥개입술후고동맥천자점적안전성급우월성。방법 장648례경고동맥개입진료환자수궤분위개량조224례、전통조21 3례화지혈기조211례，3조분별채용개량적부료붕대가압포찰법、전통적압박지혈가압포찰법화동맥압박지혈기지혈법。관찰3조적도수압박시간、지혈비용、제동시간급병발증적발생정황。결과 3조재제동시간급국부혈관병발증적발생솔방면비교무현저차이；개량조화지혈기조교전통조감소료도수압박시간，전통조화개량조교지혈기조강저료환자적지혈비용。결론 개량적부료붕대가압포찰방법감소료도수압박시간，동시강저료환자적지혈비용，치득림상추엄。
Objective To evaluate the safety and superiority of dressings and bandage compression method for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery. Methods A total of 648 patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery were randomly divided into three groups: the modified group (224 cases), the routine group (213 cases) and the haemostat group (211 cases), they each adopted modified dressings and bandage compression method, the traditional oppression hemostatic method, and arterial oppression with hemostat method. The unarmed oppression time, expenditure, braking time, and complications were observed and analyzed statistically. Results There was no significant difference in braking time and local vascular complications of the three groups. Compared with the routine group, the modified group reduced the unarmed oppression time and the medical staffs workload; compared with the hemostat group, it reduced the expenditure. Conclusions Improved dressings and bandage compression method can reduce the unarmed oppression time and expenditure, it is an ideal local hemostasis method for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery, and is worthy of clinical application.