中华创伤杂志
中華創傷雜誌
중화창상잡지
Chinese Journal of Traumatology
2015年
5期
450-453
,共4页
李鹰%张敬群%靳方方%郑启兵%刘芳%高凤林%徐加红%杨柳%鲁海强
李鷹%張敬群%靳方方%鄭啟兵%劉芳%高鳳林%徐加紅%楊柳%魯海彊
리응%장경군%근방방%정계병%류방%고봉림%서가홍%양류%로해강
光疗法%烧伤%治疗结果
光療法%燒傷%治療結果
광요법%소상%치료결과
Phototherapy%Burns%Treatment outcome
目的 探讨蓝光治疗烧伤残余创面的疗效. 方法 选择2013年4月-2013年10月大面积烧伤残余创面患者64例,烧伤面积30% ~ 80%,残余创面面积0.5%~3%,按随机数字表法分为对照组(32例)和治疗组(32例).对照组采用聚维酮碘纱布换药治疗,治疗组在对照组治疗基础上,采用蓝光照射治疗.比较两组治疗后5d创面感染控制率、治疗后10 d创面细菌清除率、创面愈合情况及创面总愈合时间. 结果 治疗后5d,治疗组感染控制19例,基本控制9例,控制不佳4例,感染控制率为88%;对照组分别为8例、14例、10例,感染控制率为69%(P<0.05).治疗后10 d,治疗组、对照组创面细菌清除率分别为81%、63% (P <0.05);治疗组创面治愈20例,显效9例,好转2例,无效1例,创面愈合率为91%,对照组分别为5例、14例、8例、5例,创面愈合率为59% (P <0.05);治疗组、对照组创面愈合时间分别为(12.5±4.5)d、(18.5±6.5)d(P<0.05). 结论 蓝光可有效杀灭烧伤残余创面细菌,加快创面愈合速度,是治疗烧伤残余创面的新型方法,值得临床推广.
目的 探討藍光治療燒傷殘餘創麵的療效. 方法 選擇2013年4月-2013年10月大麵積燒傷殘餘創麵患者64例,燒傷麵積30% ~ 80%,殘餘創麵麵積0.5%~3%,按隨機數字錶法分為對照組(32例)和治療組(32例).對照組採用聚維酮碘紗佈換藥治療,治療組在對照組治療基礎上,採用藍光照射治療.比較兩組治療後5d創麵感染控製率、治療後10 d創麵細菌清除率、創麵愈閤情況及創麵總愈閤時間. 結果 治療後5d,治療組感染控製19例,基本控製9例,控製不佳4例,感染控製率為88%;對照組分彆為8例、14例、10例,感染控製率為69%(P<0.05).治療後10 d,治療組、對照組創麵細菌清除率分彆為81%、63% (P <0.05);治療組創麵治愈20例,顯效9例,好轉2例,無效1例,創麵愈閤率為91%,對照組分彆為5例、14例、8例、5例,創麵愈閤率為59% (P <0.05);治療組、對照組創麵愈閤時間分彆為(12.5±4.5)d、(18.5±6.5)d(P<0.05). 結論 藍光可有效殺滅燒傷殘餘創麵細菌,加快創麵愈閤速度,是治療燒傷殘餘創麵的新型方法,值得臨床推廣.
목적 탐토람광치료소상잔여창면적료효. 방법 선택2013년4월-2013년10월대면적소상잔여창면환자64례,소상면적30% ~ 80%,잔여창면면적0.5%~3%,안수궤수자표법분위대조조(32례)화치료조(32례).대조조채용취유동전사포환약치료,치료조재대조조치료기출상,채용람광조사치료.비교량조치료후5d창면감염공제솔、치료후10 d창면세균청제솔、창면유합정황급창면총유합시간. 결과 치료후5d,치료조감염공제19례,기본공제9례,공제불가4례,감염공제솔위88%;대조조분별위8례、14례、10례,감염공제솔위69%(P<0.05).치료후10 d,치료조、대조조창면세균청제솔분별위81%、63% (P <0.05);치료조창면치유20례,현효9례,호전2례,무효1례,창면유합솔위91%,대조조분별위5례、14례、8례、5례,창면유합솔위59% (P <0.05);치료조、대조조창면유합시간분별위(12.5±4.5)d、(18.5±6.5)d(P<0.05). 결론 람광가유효살멸소상잔여창면세균,가쾌창면유합속도,시치료소상잔여창면적신형방법,치득림상추엄.
Objective To investigate the effect of blue light in treating the residual burn wounds.Methods Sixty-four massive burned patients with residual wounds (burn area of 30%-80% total body surface area and residual wound of 0.5%-3%) treated between April 2013 and October 2013 were allocated to control group (32 cases) and treatment group (32 cases) according to the random number table.In control group,the wounds were dressed with povidone-iodine gauze.And,except for this,patients in treatment group were treated with blue light therapy.Between-group comparison was made on infection control,bacterial clearance rate,wound healing,and healing time.Results On the fifth day after treatment,treatment group showed infection control in 19 cases,basic control in 9 cases and non-control in 4 cases,with the infection control rate of 88%;on the contrary,control group showed infection control in 8 cases,basic control in 14 cases and non-control in 10 cases,with the infection control rate of 69% (P < 0.05).On the tenth day after treatment,bacterial clearance rate between treatment and control groups was 81% and 63% respectively (P < 0.05).Rate of wound healing was 91% in treatment group including 20 cases cured,9 significantly improved,2 improved and 1 remained unchanged,but was 59% in control group with 5 cases cured,14 significantly improved,8 improved and 5 remained unchanged (P < 0.05).Healing time was (12.5 ± 4.5) days in treatment group versus (18.5± 6.5)days in control group (P < 0.05).Conclusion Blue light can effectively kill the bacterial on residual burn wound and accelerate wound closure and hence is a new method to treat residual burn wounds,worthy of clinical application.