盐酸利多卡因凝胶结合红外线治疗仪用于伤口止痛的效果

Effect of lidocaine hydrochloride gel combined with infrared ray therapeutic equipment for wound pain relief

目的：观察盐酸利多卡因凝胶结合红外线治疗仪干预疗法应用于伤口止痛的效果,并筛选最佳干预方案。方法采用随机数字表法将214例伤口患者分为4组,各组采用不同的干预方案：A组（55例）应用利多卡因凝胶湿敷5 min后红外线治疗仪照射5 min的减痛干预方案,B组（52例）采用利多卡因凝胶湿敷5 min同时红外线治疗仪照射5 min的干预减痛方案,C组（54例）采用红外线治疗仪照射5 min后利多卡因凝胶湿敷5 min的方案,D组（53例）采用利多卡因凝胶湿敷5 min的减痛方案。使用疼痛评估工具（ VAS）量表评价方案处理前、中、后及伤口包扎固定后患者疼痛得分,并统计4组护理人员的操作时间。结果 B 组在方案处理过程中疼痛得分为（2.66±2.64）分,优于 A 组（3.01±2.18）分、C组（3.16±2.32）分、D组（3.66±2.49）分,差异有统计学意义（F=3.28,P〈0.05）。 D组护理操作人员时间明显少于其他组（F=393.29,P〈0.05）。结论 B组方案在操作过程中减轻疼痛效果最明显,耗时较短。 D组方案操作时间最短,护理人员可以结合工作需求,选择最佳方案。

Objective To investigate the effect of lidocaine hydrochloride gel combined with infrared ray therapeutic equipment for wound pain relief, and find out the best intervention plan. Methods A total of 212 cases of patients with wound were randomly divided into four groups by random number table：group A （ n=55） put lidocaine gel five minutes on wound and then treated five minutes of infrared ray, group B （n=52） using five minutes lidocaine gel and treated infrared ray at the same time, group C （n=54） using infrared ray to treat and then put five minutes lidocaine gel on the wound, group D （n=53） using lidocaine gel five minutes. Visual analogue scale （VAS） was used to assess the level of pain before, middle and after intervention and count the operation time of nurses in four groups. Results The pain score of group B was （2. 66 ± 2. 64）, better than that in group A （3.01 ±2.18）, C （3.16 ±2.32） and D （3.66 ±2.49） （F=3.28,P〈0.05）. The consumption of operation time in the group D was least compared with the other three groups （F=393. 29, P〈0. 05）. Conclusions The most obvious pain relief is the group B, but the least consumption of operation time is group D, so nurses can choose different intervention according to work requirements.