无保护会阴分娩技术的临床应用与护理分析

Clinical Application and Nursing Analysis of Unprotected Perineal Delivery

目的研究与分析无保护会阴分娩技术的临床应用效果以及护理效果。方法选取在2017年2月至2018年2月时间内来我院进行分娩的产妇66例,随后采取统计学科学分组发将患者分为传统会阴分娩组(33例)与无保护会阴分娩组(33例)。我院护理人员对传统会阴分娩组产妇采取传统会阴分娩护理干预,而护理人员对无保护会阴分娩组产妇采取无保护会阴分娩护理干预,随后观察两组患者的会阴侧切率、产后2 h出血率以及会阴裂伤程度等情况。结果无保护会阴分娩组与传统会阴分娩组患者的会阴侧切率、产后2 h出血率以及会阴裂伤程度等情况具有显著差异,前者显著优于后者,数据对比具有统计学意义(卡方=1.3212,2.6843,2.9845,P <0.05)。结论无保护会阴分娩技术的临床应用效果以及护理效果显著,值得进一步进行推广与使用。

Objective to study and analyze the clinical effect and nursing effect of unprotected perineal delivery. Methods a total of 66 cases of parturients who came to our hospital for delivery between February 2017 and February 2018 were selected. Subsequently, the patients were divided into the traditional perineal delivery group（33 cases） and the unprotected perineal delivery group（33 cases） by statistical science. The nursing staff in our hospital adopted the traditional perineal labor care intervention for the parturients in the traditional perineal labor group, while the nursing staff adopted the unprotected perineal labor care intervention for the parturients in the unprotected perineal labor group, and then observed the perineal side cutting rate, 2 h postpartum bleeding rate and the degree of perineal laceration in the two groups. Results there were significant differences between the unprotected perineal labor group and the traditional perineal labor group in terms of perineal lateral incision rate, 2 h postpartum bleeding rate and degree of perineal laceration. The former is significantly better than the latter, and the data comparison has statistical significance（chi-square =1.3212, 2.6843, 2.9845, P〈0.05）. Conclusion the clinical application effect and nursing effect of unprotected perineal delivery are remarkable, which is worthy of further promotion and application.