腰椎间盘突出症术后普通引流和负压引流的对比研究

A Comparative Study on General Drainage and Vacuum Drainage in Post-operative Patients With Prolapse of Lumbar Intervertebral Disc

目的 :探讨腰椎间盘突出症术后创口引流的最佳管理模式。方法 :选择腰椎间盘突出症手术治疗且留置引流管的病人 10 0例 ,随机分为普通引流组和负压引流组 ,对两组病人的疗效和并发症发生情况及所需护理工作量进行对比分析 ,单盲评定。结果 :两组病人的疗效和并发症发生情况无统计学意义 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,但负压引流组并发瘫痪、尿潴留、椎间隙感染各 1例 ,切口内血肿3例 ,普通引流组无上述并发症 ,且护理工作量显著少于负压引流组 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 :腰椎间盘突出症术后采用普通引流较负压引流更安全可靠 ,不仅操作简便 ,减少了护理工作量 。

Objective: to explore the best managerial model of wound drainage in post-operative patients with prolapse of lumbar intervertebral disc. Method: 100 cases of inpatients with prolapse of lumbar intervertebral disc who underwent operation and retained drainage tube were selected and divided into both general drainage group and vacuum drainage group. The therapeutic efficacy of patients, complications they developed and the amounts of nursing work of the two groups were analyzed comparatively and evaluated via single-blind method. Results: there is no statistical significance between the two groups in terms of both therapeutic efficacy and the happenings of complications (P>0.05). However, there was a case complicated with paralysis, a case with retention of urine, and a case with infection of intervertebral space respectively in vacuum drainage group. There were 3 cases complicated with hematoma inside incision in vacuum drainage group. And the amounts of nursing work in general drainage group were much less than that in vacuum drainage group (P<0.05). Conclusion: in post-operative patients with prolapse of lumbar intervertebral disc, it is safer to adopt general drainage than to adopt vacuum drainage. The former is simple to manipulating. It can lighten nursing work amount. And moreover, it has little dangers to produce positive-pressure by vacuum suction.