CAJ | 학술논문

目的比较维持性血液透析(MHD)患者两种动静脉内瘘穿刺针的固定方法.方法将行MHD的患者90例分为对照组及研究组,对照组采用传统穿刺针固定方法,研究组采用“桥式”固定技术.比较两组因穿刺针脱出导致轻微出血、小量出血、大量出血和总出血事件的发生率.结果对照组患者因穿刺针脱出导致轻微出血、小量出血、大量出血的发生次数分别为3,1,2例,研究组均为0例,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),但研究组总出血事件的发生次数显著降低,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论在MHD过程中,采用“桥式”固定技术固定动静脉内瘘穿刺针,可减少由于穿刺针脱出导致的出血事件的发生.
목적 비교유지성혈액투석(MHD)환자량충동정맥내루천자침적고정방법.방법 장행MHD적환자90례분위대조조급연구조,대조조채용전통천자침고정방법,연구조채용“교식”고정기술.비교량조인천자침탈출도치경미출혈、소량출혈、대량출혈화총출혈사건적발생솔.결과 대조조환자인천자침탈출도치경미출혈、소량출혈、대량출혈적발생차수분별위3,1,2례,연구조균위0례,량조비교차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05),단연구조총출혈사건적발생차수현저강저,량조비교차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05).결론 재MHD과정중,채용“교식”고정기술고정동정맥내루천자침,가감소유우천자침탈출도치적출혈사건적발생.
Objective To compare the two kinds of fixation methods of A-V fistula needle in the patients with maintaining hemodialysis (MHD).Methods Ninety MHD patients were divided into the control group and the study group,and the control group received the traditional fixation,and the study group received the bridge fixation.The incidence rates of minimal,minor,major and total bleeding caused by pulling out needles were compared between two groups.Results No differences were found in the incidence rates of minimal,minor,major and total bleeding caused by pulling out needles between two groups (P =0.116,0.488,0.238,respectively),but the number of total bleeding in the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P =0.014).Condusions The bridge fixation of the A-V fistula needle in MHD patients can reduce the incidence of bleeding causes by pulling out needles.