可视无痛人工流产术与单纯无痛人工流产术的效果对比

Comparison on effect of visual painless artificial abortion and simple painless induced abortion

目的对可视无痛人工流产术和单纯无痛人工流产术的效果进行比较。方法 200例要求行人工流产的女性,随机分为观察组和对照组,各100例。观察组行可视无痛人工流产术,对照组行单纯无痛人工流产术。比较两组患者的术中出血量、术后阴道出血时间、并发症发生情况。结果观察组术中出血量为(9.1±2.4)ml,对照组术中出血量为(15.2±5.6)ml,观察组术中出血量少于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(t=10.012, P<0.05)。观察组术后阴道出血时间优于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(U=6.163,P<0.05)。观察组并发症发生率为0,低于对照组的9.0%,差异具有统计学意义(χ~2=9.424, P<0.05)。结论可视无痛人工流产术可以有效避免医生的盲目操作,减少患者受到的损伤,临床中可以进行推广使用。

Objective To compare the effect of visual painless artificial abortion and simple painless induced abortion. Methods A total of 200 patients requiring artificial abortion were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 100 cases in each group. The observation group received visual painless artificial abortion, and the control group received simple painless induced abortion. Comparison were made on intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative vaginal bleeding time and occurrence of complications between the two groups. Results The observation group had intraoperative bleeding volume as (9.1±2.4) ml, which was (15.2±5.6) ml in the control group. The observation group had less intraoperative bleeding volume than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (t=10.012, P<0.05). The observation group had better postoperative vaginal bleeding time than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (U=6.163, P<0.05). The observation group had incidence of complications as 0, which was lower than 9.0% than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ^2=9.424, P<0.05). Conclusion Visual painless artificial abortion can effectively avoid the blind operation of doctors and reduce the damage suffered by patients. It can be widely promoted and used in clinic.