中国医药导报
中國醫藥導報
중국의약도보
CHINA MEDICAL HERALD
2015年
21期
79-82
,共4页
产后大出血%水囊压迫%纱布填塞%基层医院
產後大齣血%水囊壓迫%紗佈填塞%基層醫院
산후대출혈%수낭압박%사포전새%기층의원
Postpartum hemorrhage%Cystic oppression%Gauze packing%Basic-level hospitals
目的：分析水囊压迫与纱布填塞治疗产后大出血在我国基层医院的应用效果。方法选择重庆市云阳县人民医院2012年1月~2014年12月产后大出血患者49例为研究对象，根据治疗方式不同将其分为纱布组（27例）和水囊组（22例）。纱布组给予纱布填塞压迫止血，水囊组患者给予水囊压迫止血。观察并记录两组患者的手术时间、止血显效时间、宫腔填塞物留置时间、有效率及再出血和感染发生率。结果水囊组手术时间[（2.4±0.6）min]及水囊滞留时间[（17.9±4.5）h]、显效时间[（2.5±0.8）min]明显少于纱布组[（4.1±1.3）min、（26.2±9.6）h、（4.9±1.1）min]，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）；水囊组再出血、子宫切除及感染发生率（9.1%、0.0%、4.5%）明显低于纱布组（18.5%、3.7%、11.1%），差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05或P<0.01）。水囊组有效率为90.9%，明显高于纱布组（77.8%），差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论产后大出血水囊压迫止血效果明显优于纱布填塞，起效快、并发症少，且对术者的技术要求不高，值得在基层医院推广应用。
目的：分析水囊壓迫與紗佈填塞治療產後大齣血在我國基層醫院的應用效果。方法選擇重慶市雲暘縣人民醫院2012年1月~2014年12月產後大齣血患者49例為研究對象，根據治療方式不同將其分為紗佈組（27例）和水囊組（22例）。紗佈組給予紗佈填塞壓迫止血，水囊組患者給予水囊壓迫止血。觀察併記錄兩組患者的手術時間、止血顯效時間、宮腔填塞物留置時間、有效率及再齣血和感染髮生率。結果水囊組手術時間[（2.4±0.6）min]及水囊滯留時間[（17.9±4.5）h]、顯效時間[（2.5±0.8）min]明顯少于紗佈組[（4.1±1.3）min、（26.2±9.6）h、（4.9±1.1）min]，差異均有統計學意義（P<0.05）；水囊組再齣血、子宮切除及感染髮生率（9.1%、0.0%、4.5%）明顯低于紗佈組（18.5%、3.7%、11.1%），差異均有統計學意義（P<0.05或P<0.01）。水囊組有效率為90.9%，明顯高于紗佈組（77.8%），差異有統計學意義（P<0.05）。結論產後大齣血水囊壓迫止血效果明顯優于紗佈填塞，起效快、併髮癥少，且對術者的技術要求不高，值得在基層醫院推廣應用。
목적：분석수낭압박여사포전새치료산후대출혈재아국기층의원적응용효과。방법선택중경시운양현인민의원2012년1월~2014년12월산후대출혈환자49례위연구대상，근거치료방식불동장기분위사포조（27례）화수낭조（22례）。사포조급여사포전새압박지혈，수낭조환자급여수낭압박지혈。관찰병기록량조환자적수술시간、지혈현효시간、궁강전새물류치시간、유효솔급재출혈화감염발생솔。결과수낭조수술시간[（2.4±0.6）min]급수낭체류시간[（17.9±4.5）h]、현효시간[（2.5±0.8）min]명현소우사포조[（4.1±1.3）min、（26.2±9.6）h、（4.9±1.1）min]，차이균유통계학의의（P<0.05）；수낭조재출혈、자궁절제급감염발생솔（9.1%、0.0%、4.5%）명현저우사포조（18.5%、3.7%、11.1%），차이균유통계학의의（P<0.05혹P<0.01）。수낭조유효솔위90.9%，명현고우사포조（77.8%），차이유통계학의의（P<0.05）。결론산후대출혈수낭압박지혈효과명현우우사포전새，기효쾌、병발증소，차대술자적기술요구불고，치득재기층의원추엄응용。
Objective To analyze the application effect of cystic oppression and gauze packing in the treatment of postpartum hemorrhage in basic-level hospitals in our country. Methods 49 patients with postpartum hemorrhage from January 2012 to December 2014 in the People's Hospital of Yunyang County were selected as the research objects, according to different treatment they were divided into the gauze group (27 cases) and cystic oppression group (22 cases). Patients of the gauze oppression group were given gauze oppression hemostasis, patients of the cystic oppression group were givencystic oppression hemostasis. The operation time, effectual time, indwelling time, efficient and incidence of further hemorrhage and infection of patients in two groups were observed and recorded. Results The operation time [(2.4±0.6) min] and indwelling time [(17.9±4.5) h], effectual time [(2.5±0.8) min] of the cystic oppression group were significantly less than those of the gauze group [(4.1±1.3) min, (26.2±9.6) h, (4.9±1.1) min], the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05);the incidence of further hemorrhage hysterectomy, and infection of the cystic oppression group (9.1%, 0.0%, 4.5%) were lower than those of the gauze group (18.5%, 3.7%, 11.1%), the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05 or P<0.01). Effective rate of the cystic oppression group was 90.9%, which was significantly higher than that of the gauze group (77.8%), the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion Cystic oppression has better hemostasis effect in postpartum hemorrhage compared with gauze packing, its quick effect, fewer complications and less technical requirements to operator, it is worthy of popularization and application in basic-level hospitals.
