末端开口静脉输液港使用不同封管液封管效果比较

Effect of open-ended venous port with different sealing fluids to seal tube

目的：观察使用预冲式导管冲洗器（ Flush）和肝素钠生理盐水（简称肝素盐水）两种封管液对末端开口式静脉输液港在连续输液期间封管的效果。方法连续输液期间,将90例使用末端开口输液港的肿瘤患者随机分为两组,分别使用预冲式导管冲洗器和100 U/ml肝素盐水封管,比较两组导管堵塞率、配药时间、封管时间和单次封管费用。结果连续输液期间,在导管堵塞率,Flush组为1.84％,肝素盐水组为1.47％,两组比较差异无统计学意义（χ^2＝0.2642,P〉0.05）；在配药时间和封管时间上, Flush组分别为（11.5±2.9） s和（10.5±2.6） s,肝素盐水组为（37.1±2.9） s和（24.6±3.3） s,两组比较差异有统计学意义（t值分别为41.982,22.797；P〈0.01）；单次使用 Flush封管较肝素盐水费用低8.83元。结论末端开口输液港在连续输液期间使用预冲式导管冲洗器（ Flush）封管安全有效,减少护士工作量,节省成本,值得推广用。

Objective To evaluate the effect of tube sealing using pre-flushed flushing syringes （ flush） and heparin saline on open-ended port for venous transfusion during continuous infusion. Methods During the period of continuous intravenous infusion, a total 90 tumor patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. They used open-ended port for venous transfusion and was sealed by using pre-flushed flushing syringes and 100 U/ml heparin saline respectively. The catheter blockage rate, dispensing time, sealing tube time and cost of single sealing tube were compared between two groups.Results During the period of continuous infusion, the catheter occlusion rate of flush group and the heparin saline group were 1.84% and 1.47% （χ^2=0.2642,P〉0.05）; on the dispensing and seal tube time,they were （11.5±2.9） seconds and （10.5±2.6） seconds in the flash group, and （37.1±2.9） seconds and （24.6±3.3） seconds in the heparin saline group （t=41.982,22.797;P〈0.01）. The cost for flush sealing is 8.33 yuan lower than that of heparin saline sealing.Conclusions During the period of continuous intravenous infusion, sealing tube by using flush on open-ended infusion port is safe and effective. The workload of the nurses and cost is reduced, it is worth to be promoted.