中外医疗
中外醫療
중외의료
CHINA FOREIGN MEDICAL TREATMENT
2014年
35期
184-185,187
,共3页
血液透析%留置导管%护理干预
血液透析%留置導管%護理榦預
혈액투석%류치도관%호리간예
Hemodialysis%Indwelling catheter%Nursing intervention
目的：讨论深静脉长期血液透析留置导管的并发症以及临床护理，为日后的临床工作提供参考。方法选择2010年3月—2012年9月在该院行深静脉长期血液透析并留置导管的患者160例为研究对象，随机分为两组，即观察组与对照组，每组患者80例。观察组患者予以舒适护理，对照组患者予以常规护理，对比两组患者的临床护理情况，并观察并发症。结果具体结果如表1、表2、表3所示。在并发症方面，观察组患者感染4例（5.0%)，出血3例（3.75%)，血栓栓塞患者5例（6.25%)，导管脱落患者2例（2.5%)；对照组患者感染21例（26.25%)，出血13例（16.25%)，血栓栓塞12例（15.0%)，导管脱落患者6例（7.5%)，观察组优于对照组，两组比较差异有统计学意义，P<0.05。在留置导管时间、焦虑量表评分以及护理满意度方面，观察组患者留置导管时间为4.90依1.22个月，焦虑自评量表评分为46.72依7.12分，护理满意度评分为91.19依3.24分；对照组患者留置导管时间为2.19依0.67个月，焦虑自评量表评分为53.24依9.46分，护理满意度评分为83.64依1.95分，观察组优于对照组，两组比较差异有统计学意义，P<0.05。在护理效果比较方面，观察组患者显效61例（76.25%)，有效12例（15.0%)，无效7例（8.75%)，总有效率为91.25%；对照组患者显效49例（61.25%)，有效8例（10.0%)，无效23例（28.75%)，总有效率为71.25%，观察组优于对照组，两组患者比较差异有统计学意义，P<0.05。结论深静脉长期血液透析留置导管的并发症较多，主要集中在感染、出血、血栓栓塞、导管脱落等几个方面，通过对患者予以舒适护理，能够取得较为积极效果，可减轻患者的痛苦，日后可在临床上推广应用。
目的：討論深靜脈長期血液透析留置導管的併髮癥以及臨床護理，為日後的臨床工作提供參攷。方法選擇2010年3月—2012年9月在該院行深靜脈長期血液透析併留置導管的患者160例為研究對象，隨機分為兩組，即觀察組與對照組，每組患者80例。觀察組患者予以舒適護理，對照組患者予以常規護理，對比兩組患者的臨床護理情況，併觀察併髮癥。結果具體結果如錶1、錶2、錶3所示。在併髮癥方麵，觀察組患者感染4例（5.0%)，齣血3例（3.75%)，血栓栓塞患者5例（6.25%)，導管脫落患者2例（2.5%)；對照組患者感染21例（26.25%)，齣血13例（16.25%)，血栓栓塞12例（15.0%)，導管脫落患者6例（7.5%)，觀察組優于對照組，兩組比較差異有統計學意義，P<0.05。在留置導管時間、焦慮量錶評分以及護理滿意度方麵，觀察組患者留置導管時間為4.90依1.22箇月，焦慮自評量錶評分為46.72依7.12分，護理滿意度評分為91.19依3.24分；對照組患者留置導管時間為2.19依0.67箇月，焦慮自評量錶評分為53.24依9.46分，護理滿意度評分為83.64依1.95分，觀察組優于對照組，兩組比較差異有統計學意義，P<0.05。在護理效果比較方麵，觀察組患者顯效61例（76.25%)，有效12例（15.0%)，無效7例（8.75%)，總有效率為91.25%；對照組患者顯效49例（61.25%)，有效8例（10.0%)，無效23例（28.75%)，總有效率為71.25%，觀察組優于對照組，兩組患者比較差異有統計學意義，P<0.05。結論深靜脈長期血液透析留置導管的併髮癥較多，主要集中在感染、齣血、血栓栓塞、導管脫落等幾箇方麵，通過對患者予以舒適護理，能夠取得較為積極效果，可減輕患者的痛苦，日後可在臨床上推廣應用。
목적：토론심정맥장기혈액투석류치도관적병발증이급림상호리，위일후적림상공작제공삼고。방법선택2010년3월—2012년9월재해원행심정맥장기혈액투석병류치도관적환자160례위연구대상，수궤분위량조，즉관찰조여대조조，매조환자80례。관찰조환자여이서괄호리，대조조환자여이상규호리，대비량조환자적림상호리정황，병관찰병발증。결과구체결과여표1、표2、표3소시。재병발증방면，관찰조환자감염4례（5.0%)，출혈3례（3.75%)，혈전전새환자5례（6.25%)，도관탈락환자2례（2.5%)；대조조환자감염21례（26.25%)，출혈13례（16.25%)，혈전전새12례（15.0%)，도관탈락환자6례（7.5%)，관찰조우우대조조，량조비교차이유통계학의의，P<0.05。재류치도관시간、초필량표평분이급호리만의도방면，관찰조환자류치도관시간위4.90의1.22개월，초필자평량표평분위46.72의7.12분，호리만의도평분위91.19의3.24분；대조조환자류치도관시간위2.19의0.67개월，초필자평량표평분위53.24의9.46분，호리만의도평분위83.64의1.95분，관찰조우우대조조，량조비교차이유통계학의의，P<0.05。재호리효과비교방면，관찰조환자현효61례（76.25%)，유효12례（15.0%)，무효7례（8.75%)，총유효솔위91.25%；대조조환자현효49례（61.25%)，유효8례（10.0%)，무효23례（28.75%)，총유효솔위71.25%，관찰조우우대조조，량조환자비교차이유통계학의의，P<0.05。결론심정맥장기혈액투석류치도관적병발증교다，주요집중재감염、출혈、혈전전새、도관탈락등궤개방면，통과대환자여이서괄호리，능구취득교위적겁효과，가감경환자적통고，일후가재림상상추엄응용。
Objective To discuss the complications due to long-term deep venous indwelling catheter for hemodialysis and the corresponding clinical nursing so as to provide a reference for clinical work in the future. Methods 160 cases underwent hemodialysis with long-term deep venous indwelling catheter from March 2010 to September 2012 were selected and randomly di-vided into two groups, the observation group and the control group with 80 cases in each. The observation group were given the comfortable nursing, and the control group were given the conventional nursing. And the clinical nursing status was compared, and complications were observed between the two groups. Results The specific results were shown in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3. In the aspect of complications, in the observation group, 4 cases(5.0%) had infection, 3 cases(3.75%) had hemorrhage, 5 cases(6.25%) had thrombembolia, 2 cases(2.5%) had catheter loss; in the control group, 21 cases (26.25%) had infection, 13 cases(16.25%) had hemorrhage, 12 cases(15.0%) had thrombembolia, 6 cases(7.5%) had catheter loss. The observation group was better than the con-trol group in this aspect, there was statistically significant difference between the two groups, P<0.05. The indwelling catheter time, self-rating anxiety scale scores and patientsˊsatisfaction with nursing care of the observation group was 4.90±1.22 months, 46.72±7.12 points, 91.19±3.24 points, respectively, and that of the control group was 2.19±0.67 months, 53.24±9.46 points, 83.64±1.95 points, respectively, the observation group was better than the control group in the three aspects, the differences between the two groups were statistically significant, P<0.05. In the observation group, the nursing was markedly effective in 61 cases (76.25%), ef-fective in 12 cases (15.0%), ineffective in 7 cases (8.75%), the total efficiency was 91.25%; in the control group, the nursing was markedly effective in 49 cases (61.25%), effective in 8 cases (10.0%), ineffective in 23 cases (28.75%), the total efficiency was 71.25%, the observation group had better nursing effect than the control group, the difference between the two groups was statisti-cally significant, P<0.05. Conclusion Long-term deep venous indwelling catheter for hemodialysis has many complications, mainly include infection, bleeding, thrombembolia, catheter loss and so on, but comfortable nursing given to the patients can achieve posi-tive effect, which can reduce the pain of the patients, so it is can be promoted in the clinical practice in the future.
