论文部分内容阅读
目的通过比较MEBO(湿润烧伤膏)与普通换药治疗外伤性皮肤缺损,回顾性评价MEBO治疗外伤性皮肤缺损临床效果。方法 2008年12月~2011年12月对56例外伤性皮肤缺损的患者资料进行回顾性分析,随机分为2组,MEBO组(A组)35例和普通换药组(B组)21例,对2组患者的创面渗出、创面愈合时间、创面感染率等进行比较分析。结果 2组患者均获得随访,随访时间8~21个月,平均18个月。A组创面的平均痊愈时间15.3±3.6 d明显短于B组21.5±4.3 d(P<0.05),A组优良率82.9%,高于B组57.1%,A组无创面感染,B组创面感染3例(P<0.05)。结论 MEBO治疗小面积浅层组织和皮肤缺损临床疗效好,应用方便,值得推广。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of MEBO (MEBO) with ordinary dressing in the treatment of traumatic skin defects and to evaluate the clinical efficacy of MEBO in the treatment of traumatic skin defects. Methods From December 2008 to December 2011, 56 patients with traumatic skin defect were retrospectively analyzed. They were randomly divided into 2 groups: 35 patients in MEBO group (A group) and 21 patients in general dressing group (B group) The wound exudation, wound healing time and wound infection rate in two groups were compared and analyzed. Results Both groups were followed up for 8-21 months with an average of 18 months. The average recovery time of wounds in group A was significantly shorter than that in group B (15.3 ± 3.6 days vs 21.5 ± 4.3 days, P <0.05). The excellent and good rate in group A was 82.9%, higher than that in group B (57.1% 3 cases (P <0.05). Conclusion MEBO has a good clinical curative effect on small area of superficial tissue and skin defect, which is easy to be applied and worth popularizing.