尺骨鹰嘴解剖型钛板与微型加压外固定器治疗尺骨鹰嘴骨折临床疗效比较

Ulna hawk mouth dissection titanium board and outside the miniature compression the anchor treatment ulna hawk mouth bone fracture clinical curative effect compares

目的：探讨尺骨鹰嘴解剖型钛板与微型加压外固定器治疗尺骨鹰嘴骨折临床疗效.方法：42例患者随机分为两组I组和II组,Ⅰ组为尺骨鹰嘴钢板内固定组21 例,Ⅱ组为微型加压外固定器21例,比较两者的疗效差异.结果Ⅰ组的治疗效果要优于Ⅱ组（P＜0.05）,但并发症的发生率高于B组（P＜0.05）,两组存在显著性差异;两组患者满意率差异不大,（P ＞0.05）.结论： 两种治疗方式各有其治疗的优势,其综合效果差异不大,应根据患者的实际情况选择较为合适的治疗方式,以减轻患者的痛苦和经济负担,达到最佳的治疗效.

Objective： Discusses ulna hawk mouth dissection titanium board and outside the miniature compression the anchor treatment ulna hawk mouth bone fracture clinical curative effect. Methods：42 example patients divide into two group of Ⅰ group and Ⅱ group stochastically, Ⅰ The group is in the ulna hawk mouth steel plate the fixed group 21 examples, Ⅱ Group for miniature compression outside anchor 21 examples,compared with both curative effect difference. Finally Ⅰ Group＇s treatment result must surpass II group （P〈0.05） ,but the complication formation rate is higher than 13 group （P〈0. 05） ,two groups has the significance differencel Two group of patient satisfaction rate difference is not big, （P 〉0.05）. Conelusion：Two treatment ways have its treatment superiority respectively, its synthesis effect difference is not big, should choose the more appropriate treatment way according to patient＇s actual situation,reduces patient＇s pain and the economic burden,achieved best governs the curative effect.