CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨丙泊酚用于行门诊手术围绝经期女性焦虑状态和应激反应的影响。方法选取于我院门诊进行手术治疗的围绝经期女性患者42例，通过采用利多卡因辅用丙泊酚组(P组)及单纯利多卡因(L组)进行麻醉，观察并对比分析两组患者的手术前后SAS评分以及MAP、 HR等变化情况。结果两组患者术前SAS评分间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；辅用丙泊酚进行麻醉后， P组患者的SAS评分的平均值较术前降低，而L组患者SAS评分平均值较术前升高，但两组患者组内手术前后及术后组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；两组患者术前及术中MAP、 HR均较为平稳，但在术后L组患者的MAP、 HR值较P组显著升高(P<0.05)； P组患者满意9例、基本满意10例、不满意2例；而L组患者中满意6例、基本满意7例、不满意8例，组间对比发现，辅用丙泊酚后，患者的满意度显著提升(χ2=4.725， P=0.030)。结论通过采用利多卡因辅用丙泊酚麻醉，能够在一定程度上缓解患者的焦虑情绪，同时维持正常的血流动力学，减少应激反应的发生，同时提高了患者的满意度，对于预防和减少围绝经期女性行门诊手术时焦虑情绪和应激反应具有良好的效果。
목적：탐토병박분용우행문진수술위절경기녀성초필상태화응격반응적영향。방법선취우아원문진진행수술치료적위절경기녀성환자42례，통과채용리다잡인보용병박분조(P조)급단순리다잡인(L조)진행마취，관찰병대비분석량조환자적수술전후SAS평분이급MAP、 HR등변화정황。결과량조환자술전SAS평분간차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)；보용병박분진행마취후， P조환자적SAS평분적평균치교술전강저，이L조환자SAS평분평균치교술전승고，단량조환자조내수술전후급술후조간비교차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)；량조환자술전급술중MAP、 HR균교위평은，단재술후L조환자적MAP、 HR치교P조현저승고(P<0.05)； P조환자만의9례、기본만의10례、불만의2례；이L조환자중만의6례、기본만의7례、불만의8례，조간대비발현，보용병박분후，환자적만의도현저제승(χ2=4.725， P=0.030)。결론통과채용리다잡인보용병박분마취，능구재일정정도상완해환자적초필정서，동시유지정상적혈류동역학，감소응격반응적발생，동시제고료환자적만의도，대우예방화감소위절경기녀성행문진수술시초필정서화응격반응구유량호적효과。
Objective To investigate the effect of propofol on anxiety and stress reactions in the perimenopausal women who received outpatient surgeries. Methods We assigned 42 perimenopausal women who received outpatient surgeries in our hospital to recieved either an anaesthetic of lidocaine combined with propofol (Group P) or lidocaine only (Group L). The primary outcome was a comparative analysis of preoperative and postoperative SAS scores, and changes in MAP, HR of the two groups. Results The preoperative SAS scores were of no significant difference between these two groups (P>0.05). After propofol was assisted with the anesthesia, the mean value of the SAS score was lower than preoperative ones in Group P, while that of the Group L was higher. As for the values of MAP and HR, there were no statistically significant differences (P>0.05) between the two groups preoperatively. The preoperative and intraoperative values of MAP and HR were relatively stable;but the postoperative values of MAP and HR in Group L were significantly higher than Group P (P<0.05). In Group P, 9 cases were satisfied with the treatment, 10 basically satisfied, 2 dissatisfied;whereas in Group L, 6 cases were satisfied with the treatment, 7 basically satisfied, 8 dissatisfied;the patients' satisfaction significantly improved after propofol was assisted with the anesthesia (χ2=4.725, P=0.030). Conclusions Applying the anaesthetic of lidocaine combined with propofol, can alleviate patients' anxiety to some extent, maintain normal hemodynamics, meanwhile reduce the incidence of stress reactions, improve patients' satisfaction, which is effective in preventing and reducing the anxiety and stress reasctions in perimenopausal women when they receive outpatient surgery.