应用封闭式负压引流在大面积皮肤缺损合并感染疗效分析

Efficacy of vacuum sealing drainage therapy in treatment of large skin defect complicated with infections

目的比较封闭式负压引流技术(VSD)与常规换药在大面积皮肤缺损合并感染中疗效,总结处理措施,预防并减少感染的发生。方法将87例大面积皮肤缺损合并感染病例随机分为对照组37例和治疗组50例;两组均进行感染控制、清创并彻底冲洗伤口;治疗组采用封闭负压引流技术,对照组采用常规换药。结果治疗组在清洁时间、创面愈合时间、创面愈合率分别为(7.2±1.85)d、(12.7±2.09)d、(96.5±2.34)%,对比两组患者创面愈合疗效,3个指标均优于对照组(P<0.01);治疗组在换药次数、住院天数及治疗总费用分别为(3.4±1.7)次、(18.5±3.12)d、(7655.3±432.75)元,治疗组均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 VSD技术更有利于保护创面、引流脓液、控制感染、促进创面愈合,在提高创面治疗效果同时减少护理工作量。

OBJECTIVE To compare the curative effect between the vacuum sealing drainage （VSD） therapy and the routine dressing on the treatment of large skin defect complicated with infections and summarize the treatment measures so as to reduce the incidence of infections. METHODS A total of 56 cases of large skin defect patients complicated with infections were randomly divided into the control group with 37 cases and the treatment group with 50 cases; the infection control, debridement and thorough wound flushing were carried out in both of the two groups ; the treatment group was treated with VSD, the control group treated with the routine dressing. RESULTS The clean-up time, wound healing time and wound healing rate of the treatment group were（7.2 ± 1.85） d, （12.7 ± 2.09） d, （96.5± 2.34） %, as compared with the wound healing effect between the two groups, the three indica- tors of the treatment group were better than those of the control group （P〈0.01）. The dressing frequency, length of hospital stay, and total treatment cost of the treatment group were （3.4±1.7） times, （18.5± 3.12） d, and （7655.3±432.75） yuan, respectively, which were better than the control group , the difference was statisti- cally significant （P〈0.01）. CONCLUSION VSD therapy can benefit the protection of the wound, drainage fluid, and the control of infections and promote the wound healing, while reducing the nursing workload.