国际护理学杂志
國際護理學雜誌
국제호이학잡지
International Journal of Nursing
2015年
22期
3151-3153
,共3页
前馈控制%导管相关性感染%护理
前饋控製%導管相關性感染%護理
전궤공제%도관상관성감염%호리
Feedforward control%Catheter-related infection%Nursing
目的:探讨前馈控制理论引入导管护理管理,对导管相关性感染发生率的影响。方法采用前馈控制护理管理方法对92例患者各类留置导管进行干预,包括护士科学配置、各种导管的置入、导管固定规范护理操作以及留置导管的及时评估等,全程执行规范护理,统计导管相关性感染发生率,与非前馈控制护理管理下91例患者的导管相关性感染率进行比较。观察前馈控制的有效性。结果前馈控制护理92例患者,共置入各种导管126根,非前馈控制护理患者91例,置入导管122根;前馈控制护理组有10人发生导管相关性感,感染率7.9%(10/126),非前馈控制护理组有25人发生导管相关性感染,感染率20.5%(25/122)。两组比较,差异有统计学意义( P<0.01)。结论前馈控制护理管理能有效减少导管相关性感染的发生。
目的:探討前饋控製理論引入導管護理管理,對導管相關性感染髮生率的影響。方法採用前饋控製護理管理方法對92例患者各類留置導管進行榦預,包括護士科學配置、各種導管的置入、導管固定規範護理操作以及留置導管的及時評估等,全程執行規範護理,統計導管相關性感染髮生率,與非前饋控製護理管理下91例患者的導管相關性感染率進行比較。觀察前饋控製的有效性。結果前饋控製護理92例患者,共置入各種導管126根,非前饋控製護理患者91例,置入導管122根;前饋控製護理組有10人髮生導管相關性感,感染率7.9%(10/126),非前饋控製護理組有25人髮生導管相關性感染,感染率20.5%(25/122)。兩組比較,差異有統計學意義( P<0.01)。結論前饋控製護理管理能有效減少導管相關性感染的髮生。
목적:탐토전궤공제이론인입도관호리관리,대도관상관성감염발생솔적영향。방법채용전궤공제호리관리방법대92례환자각류류치도관진행간예,포괄호사과학배치、각충도관적치입、도관고정규범호리조작이급류치도관적급시평고등,전정집행규범호리,통계도관상관성감염발생솔,여비전궤공제호리관리하91례환자적도관상관성감염솔진행비교。관찰전궤공제적유효성。결과전궤공제호리92례환자,공치입각충도관126근,비전궤공제호리환자91례,치입도관122근;전궤공제호리조유10인발생도관상관성감,감염솔7.9%(10/126),비전궤공제호리조유25인발생도관상관성감염,감염솔20.5%(25/122)。량조비교,차이유통계학의의( P<0.01)。결론전궤공제호리관리능유효감소도관상관성감염적발생。
Objective To discuss feedforward control theories to introduce catheter nursing management, and the impact on the incidence of catheter-related infections. Methods The feedforward control nursing management methods, which included nurses scientific configuration, all kinds of catheter placement, standard nursing operation for catheter fixed and timely assessment of indwelling catheter, was being used to intervene 92 cases of patients with indwelling catheter. The standard nursing was carried out during the whole process of the management. The catheter related infection rate was compared with the 91 patients of un-feedforward control nursing management, and the effectiveness of the feedforward control was observed. Results A total of 92 patients under feedforward control nursing were placed into 126 catheters of various kinds and 91 patients under un-feedforward control nursing were placed into 122 catheters;totally 10 patients had cathe- ter-related infection in feedforward control group with an infection rate of 7. 9% (10/126), while 25 patients had catheter-related infection in the un-feedforward control nursing group with an infection rate of 20. 5% ( 25/122 ) . The differences were statistically significant ( P<0. 01) . Conclusions The feedforward control can reduce the catheter-related infection effectively.