CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较会阴侧切术中不同侧切角度及缝合方法的优劣。方法选取2009年2月～2012年1月于我院妇产科实施会阴侧切术的初产妇300例，按照随机分配原则，将患者分为观察组（158例）与对照组（142例）：观察组行30°会阴切开，切口内可吸收缝合线皮内连续缝合方法；对照组行45°会阴切开，采用传统皮外缝合方法。比较两组患者切口愈合、住院时间、切口疼痛等情况。结果观察组与对照组切口愈合率分别为94.94%（150/158）、83.09%（118/142），两组比较差异显著（P＜0.05）；观察组住院时间、切口疼痛程度与对照组比较均具有统计学差异性（P＜0.05）。结论30°会阴侧切内可吸收缝合线皮内连续缝合方法用于手术缝合中，与传统45°会阴切开皮外缝合方法比较，其切口愈合率高、住院时间短、疼痛程度较轻，值得广泛应用于临床。
목적：비교회음측절술중불동측절각도급봉합방법적우렬。방법선취2009년2월～2012년1월우아원부산과실시회음측절술적초산부300례，안조수궤분배원칙，장환자분위관찰조（158례）여대조조（142례）：관찰조행30°회음절개，절구내가흡수봉합선피내련속봉합방법；대조조행45°회음절개，채용전통피외봉합방법。비교량조환자절구유합、주원시간、절구동통등정황。결과관찰조여대조조절구유합솔분별위94.94%（150/158）、83.09%（118/142），량조비교차이현저（P＜0.05）；관찰조주원시간、절구동통정도여대조조비교균구유통계학차이성（P＜0.05）。결론30°회음측절내가흡수봉합선피내련속봉합방법용우수술봉합중，여전통45°회음절개피외봉합방법비교，기절구유합솔고、주원시간단、동통정도교경，치득엄범응용우림상。
Objective To observe and compare the episiotomy different angles and lateral suture method.Methods 300 cases of episiotomy primipara in the department of obstetrics and gynecology in our hospital from February 2009 to January 2012 were chosen. In accordance with the principle of random assignment, patients were divided into the observation group(158 cases) and the control group(142 cases). The observation group was taken with 30°episiotomy, continuous suture absorbable sutures inside the skin incision method, and the control group was taken with 45°episiotomy with the traditional method of skin suture.The wound healing, hospital stay,incision pain and so on for the two groups were compared.ResultsThe wound healing rates in the observation group and control group were 94.94%(150/158) and 83.09% (118/142),and the differences were significant(P<0.05).The hospitalization,incision pain in the observation group compared with the control group,there were statistical differences (P<0.05). Conclusion30°absorbable can suture the episiotomy continuous method for skin sutures in surgical sutures,the wound healing rate is higher,hospital stay is shorter,and with less pain,it is worthy of widely used in clinical practice.