期刊文献+

亲水纤维敷料结合清创在渗出性压力性损伤伤口中的疗效观察

Observation of Curative Effect of Hydrophilic Fiber Dressing Combined with Debridement in Exudative Pressure Injury Wounds
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨亲水纤维敷料结合清创的疗效。方法:随机选取渗出性(渗出量大于外层敷料1/3的中到大量渗出性伤口)压力性损伤伤口,共47例60处伤口,分为实验组、对照组各30处伤口,实验组给予患者使用亲水纤维敷料结合保守锐性清创,对照组仅给予保守锐性清创,直至失活组织全部去除。结果:实验组清创时间为(15.60 ±6.39),对照组清创期时间为(19.47 ±7.50),2组对比差异有统计学意义(p 【0.05),实验组清创时间短于对照组;2组伤口压疮愈合计分(PUSH值)组间比较差异有统计学意义(p 【0.05),2组伤口压疮愈合计分(PUSH值)都随时间呈下降趋势,且实验组下降的幅度较大,差异有统计学意义(p 【0.001)。结论:亲水纤维敷料可以使失活组织软化,吸附带走伤口上的失活组织,使清创的效果更好。 Objective: To explore the effect of hydrophilic fiber dressing combined with debridement. Methods Randomly selected exudative (medium to large exudative wounds with an exudative amount greater than 1/3 of the outer dressing) pressure injury wounds, a total of 47 cases of 60 wounds, divided into experimental group and control group 30 wounds. In the experimental group, patients were treated with hydrophilic fiber dressing combined with conservative sharp debridement, while in the control group, only conservative sharp debridement was given until all inactivated tissue was removed. Results: The debridement time of the experimental group was (15.60 ±6.39), and the debridement time of the control group was (19.47 ±7.50). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p <0.05). The debridement time of the experimental group was shorter than that of the control group;the difference in wound pressure ulcer healing score (PUSH value) between the two groups was statistically significant (p <0.05). The wound pressure ulcer healing score (PUSH value) of both groups showed a downward trend with time, and the experimental group decreased amplitude is large, and the difference is statistically significant (p <0.001). Conclusion: Hydrophilic fiber dressing can soften the inactivated tissue, absorb and remove the inactivated tissue on the wound, and make the debridement effect better.
作者 吴锦笭
出处 《临床医学进展》 2021年第12期5898-5904,共7页 Advances in Clinical Medicine
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献59

  • 1蒋琪霞,申萍,周国琴,彭青.湿性疗法在治疗皮肤放射性损伤中的作用[J].医学研究生学报,2005,18(9):802-804. 被引量:31
  • 2蒋琪霞,彭青,马萍.湿性疗法治愈狗咬伤小腿皮肤感染坏死1例[J].护理研究(上旬版),2007,21(1):84-85. 被引量:7
  • 3Steed DL. Debridement[J]. Am J Surg,2004,187(5A):71-74.
  • 4Thomas S, Jones M. Wound debridement: evaluating the costs[J]. Nurs Stand,2001,15(22) :59-61.
  • 5O'Brien M. Exploring methods of wound debridement[J]. Br J Community Nurs,2002,12:10-18.
  • 6Gordon B. Conservative sharp wound debridement:state boards of nursing positions[J]. J Wound Ostomy and Continence Nurs,1996,23(3): 137-143.
  • 7Fairbairn K,Grier J,Hunter C. A sharp debridement procedure devised by specialist nurses[J]. J Wound Care,2002,11(10):371-375.
  • 8Keryln Carville. Wound Care Manual[M]. Osborne Park, Australia: Silver Chain Foundation,2005:82-93.
  • 9Parnell LK,Ciufi B,Gokoo CF. Preliminary use of a hydro gel conraining enzymes in the treatment of stage Ⅱ and stage Ⅲ pressure ulcers[J]. Ostomy Wound Manage,2005,51(8):50-60.
  • 10Konig M,Vanscheidt W,Augustin M,et al. Enzymatic versus autolytic debridement of chronic leg ulcers:a prospective randomized trial[J]. J Wound Care,2005,14(7) :320-323.

共引文献298

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部