河北医学
河北醫學
하북의학
HEBEI MEDICINE
2015年
7期
1204-1207
,共4页
循证护理%创伤性休克%院前急救
循證護理%創傷性休剋%院前急救
순증호리%창상성휴극%원전급구
Evidence-based care%Traumatic shock%Pre-admission emergency treatment
目的：探讨循证护理流程在创伤性休克患者院前抢救效果以及对满意度的影响。方法：61例创伤性休克患者按照接诊的先后顺序分为观察组31例和对照组30例，对照组实施传统的护理就诊流程，观察组实施循证护理流程，比较救治结局。结果：观察组患者休克缓解时间（2．34±0．49） h及术前准备时间（10．11±2．02）min，均短于对照组的（2．81±0．50）h及术前准备时间（17．83±2．78）min，差异有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。观察组患者抢救成功率90．32％、并发症发生率22．58％，对照组抢救成功率76．67％，并发症发生率36．67％，差异有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。观察组非常满意27例、一般满意2例和不满意2例，对照组非常满意24例、一般满意4例和不满意2例，差异有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。结论：循证护理流程能快速缓解创伤性休克，保持生命体征稳定，提高院前抢救效果，降低并发症发生率，提高护理满意度。
目的：探討循證護理流程在創傷性休剋患者院前搶救效果以及對滿意度的影響。方法：61例創傷性休剋患者按照接診的先後順序分為觀察組31例和對照組30例，對照組實施傳統的護理就診流程，觀察組實施循證護理流程，比較救治結跼。結果：觀察組患者休剋緩解時間（2．34±0．49） h及術前準備時間（10．11±2．02）min，均短于對照組的（2．81±0．50）h及術前準備時間（17．83±2．78）min，差異有統計學意義（ P＜0．05）。觀察組患者搶救成功率90．32％、併髮癥髮生率22．58％，對照組搶救成功率76．67％，併髮癥髮生率36．67％，差異有統計學意義（ P＜0．05）。觀察組非常滿意27例、一般滿意2例和不滿意2例，對照組非常滿意24例、一般滿意4例和不滿意2例，差異有統計學意義（ P＜0．05）。結論：循證護理流程能快速緩解創傷性休剋，保持生命體徵穩定，提高院前搶救效果，降低併髮癥髮生率，提高護理滿意度。
목적：탐토순증호리류정재창상성휴극환자원전창구효과이급대만의도적영향。방법：61례창상성휴극환자안조접진적선후순서분위관찰조31례화대조조30례，대조조실시전통적호리취진류정，관찰조실시순증호리류정，비교구치결국。결과：관찰조환자휴극완해시간（2．34±0．49） h급술전준비시간（10．11±2．02）min，균단우대조조적（2．81±0．50）h급술전준비시간（17．83±2．78）min，차이유통계학의의（ P＜0．05）。관찰조환자창구성공솔90．32％、병발증발생솔22．58％，대조조창구성공솔76．67％，병발증발생솔36．67％，차이유통계학의의（ P＜0．05）。관찰조비상만의27례、일반만의2례화불만의2례，대조조비상만의24례、일반만의4례화불만의2례，차이유통계학의의（ P＜0．05）。결론：순증호리류정능쾌속완해창상성휴극，보지생명체정은정，제고원전창구효과，강저병발증발생솔，제고호리만의도。
Objective:To investigate the pre-admission emergency treatment effects of evidence-based care and the effects on the degree of satisfaction in patients with traumatic shock.Method:A total of 61 pa-tients with traumatic shock were divided into observation group ( 31 patients ) and control group ( 30 pa-tients) according to the sequence of visit.The control group was given with traditional nursing care, while the observation group was given with evidence-based care, and the emergency treatment outcomes were com-pared.Result:In the patients of the observation group, the shock remission time and preoperative preparation time were (2.34±0.49) hours and (10.11±2.02) min, respectively, while those of the control group were (2.81±0.50) hours and (17.83±2.78) min, respectively;the patients of the observation group had shorter shock remission time and preoperative preparation time than htose of the control group, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05) .The achievement ratio of emergency treatment and the incidence of complications of the patients of the observation group were 90.32%and 22.58%, respectively, while those of the control group were 76.67%and 36.67%, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05) .In the observation group, 27 patients were extremely satisfied, 2 patients were generally satis-fied, and 2 patients were unsatisfied;while in the control group, 24 patients were extremely satisfied, 4 pa-tients were generally satisfied, and 2 patients were unsatisfied;and the difference was statistically significant ( P<0.05) .Conclusion:Evidence-based care can rapidly release traumatic shock, keep vital signs stable, elevate pre-admission emergency treatment effects, reduce the incidence of complications, and elevate de-gree of satisfaction to the nursing care.
