中国卫生产业
中國衛生產業
중국위생산업
China Health Industry
2015年
17期
170-172
,共3页
姜新%李春卉%孙艳美%梁宇杰%王春艳%王红明
薑新%李春卉%孫豔美%樑宇傑%王春豔%王紅明
강신%리춘훼%손염미%량우걸%왕춘염%왕홍명
皮肤消毒%细菌培养%旋转方向
皮膚消毒%細菌培養%鏇轉方嚮
피부소독%세균배양%선전방향
Skin disinfection%Bacterial culture%Rotation direction
目的 比较棉签正﹑反方向和同一方向消毒皮肤的效果,为临床护理选择更理想﹑更实用的皮肤消毒方法提供依据.方法 对受试者在手背相同部位,分别采取正﹑反方向(实验组)和同一方向(对照组)的方法消毒后,进行消毒区域采样,分析:①两种消毒方法所需时间﹑消毒后皮肤待干时间;②经两种消毒方法皮肤可采集菌落情况﹑菌落数,进行消毒中心与消毒区域周围(距中心1 cm处﹑距中心2.5 cm处)的对比. 结果 ①实验组与对照组两种消毒方法的消毒时间﹑待干时间无差异(P>0.05);②两种消毒方法菌落可检测概率和细菌菌落数无差异(P>0.05),实验组中心位置与消毒区域周围比较有差异(vs距中心1 cm处,P<0.05;vs 距中心2.5 cm处,P<0.01). 结论 ①临床护理工作中不必采用一反一正消毒方法,正反消毒法和常规消毒法的消毒时间和消毒效果一致;②临床注射时不能随意改变进针点,如消毒中心位置血管状况不佳时,可选择以穿刺点为中心小于半径1 cm的范围内进针.
目的 比較棉籤正﹑反方嚮和同一方嚮消毒皮膚的效果,為臨床護理選擇更理想﹑更實用的皮膚消毒方法提供依據.方法 對受試者在手揹相同部位,分彆採取正﹑反方嚮(實驗組)和同一方嚮(對照組)的方法消毒後,進行消毒區域採樣,分析:①兩種消毒方法所需時間﹑消毒後皮膚待榦時間;②經兩種消毒方法皮膚可採集菌落情況﹑菌落數,進行消毒中心與消毒區域週圍(距中心1 cm處﹑距中心2.5 cm處)的對比. 結果 ①實驗組與對照組兩種消毒方法的消毒時間﹑待榦時間無差異(P>0.05);②兩種消毒方法菌落可檢測概率和細菌菌落數無差異(P>0.05),實驗組中心位置與消毒區域週圍比較有差異(vs距中心1 cm處,P<0.05;vs 距中心2.5 cm處,P<0.01). 結論 ①臨床護理工作中不必採用一反一正消毒方法,正反消毒法和常規消毒法的消毒時間和消毒效果一緻;②臨床註射時不能隨意改變進針點,如消毒中心位置血管狀況不佳時,可選擇以穿刺點為中心小于半徑1 cm的範圍內進針.
목적 비교면첨정﹑반방향화동일방향소독피부적효과,위림상호리선택경이상﹑경실용적피부소독방법제공의거.방법 대수시자재수배상동부위,분별채취정﹑반방향(실험조)화동일방향(대조조)적방법소독후,진행소독구역채양,분석:①량충소독방법소수시간﹑소독후피부대간시간;②경량충소독방법피부가채집균락정황﹑균락수,진행소독중심여소독구역주위(거중심1 cm처﹑거중심2.5 cm처)적대비. 결과 ①실험조여대조조량충소독방법적소독시간﹑대간시간무차이(P>0.05);②량충소독방법균락가검측개솔화세균균락수무차이(P>0.05),실험조중심위치여소독구역주위비교유차이(vs거중심1 cm처,P<0.05;vs 거중심2.5 cm처,P<0.01). 결론 ①림상호리공작중불필채용일반일정소독방법,정반소독법화상규소독법적소독시간화소독효과일치;②림상주사시불능수의개변진침점,여소독중심위치혈관상황불가시,가선택이천자점위중심소우반경1 cm적범위내진침.
Objective In order to provide the basis for a more practical skin disinfection method, we compared the disin-fecting effects of two swabs in the opposite directions (experimental group) and same direction (control group), respectively. Methods We took samples in different parts of the subjects through these two different disinfection methods. Then some pa-rameters of these two methods, such as contamination levels, colony counts after contamination, the time for disinfection, and drying skin after disinfecting, and the status of skin around the disinfecting point (1cm and 2.5cm away from the center) were analyzed. Results The contamination level of the central part is different from the contamination level of the part 1cm away from the center (P<0.05). And so as the contamination level of the central part 2.5cm away from the center (P<0.01). There are no statistical differences in the disinfection and the time between experimental group and control group, and the contamination rates and colony counts are as well (P>0.05). Conclusion Opposite directions disinfection method is not nec-essary in clinical care. Effect of theses two disinfection methods are similar. However, we shouldn't change the needle point in clinical injection. Though the vascular conditions in disinfecting center is poor, we should insert needle in the part where the needle point is within 1cm away from the center.