论文部分内容阅读
目的比较聚维酮碘刷手法和免刷手法对手术室护士手部皮肤状况的影响。方法 2013年6月-2014年12月采用随机数字表抽样法随机抽查3家三级甲等医院手术室护士共150名,编号排序后用随机数字表分为对照组和研究组,每组75人。对照组采用传统聚维酮碘刷手的外科洗手方法,研究组采用免刷手的外科洗手方法,两组洗手完毕均按手术工作要求戴无菌手套。比较两组手部皮肤状况和消毒效果。结果对照组洗手后发生皮肤干燥34例(45.3%),脱屑9例(12.0%),紧绷感51例(68.0%),过敏5例(6.7%);研究组洗手后发生皮肤干燥19例(25.3%),脱屑0例(0.0%),紧绷感21例(28.0%),过敏0例(0.0%);两组以上状况发生率差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组外科手消毒的效果均能达到《消毒技术规范》标准,细菌总数≤5 cfu/cm2,未检出致病菌。结论免刷手法能达到外科手消毒要求,且可保护手术室护士手部皮肤。
Objective To compare the effect of Povidone iodine brushing and brushless manipulation on the hand skin condition of nurses in operating room. Methods From June 2013 to December 2014, 150 randomly selected nurses from three Grade A hospitals were divided into control group and study group by random number table people. In the control group, the traditional handwashing method of Povidone iodine brush was used. The research team adopted the surgical hand-washing method without brushing, and the two groups were required to wear sterile gloves according to the surgical work after they finished their hand-washing. Compare the two groups of hand skin condition and disinfection effect. Results In the control group, 34 cases (45.3%) had dry skin, 9 cases (12.0%) desquamation, 51 cases (68.0%) felt tightness and 5 cases (6.7%) had allergy. The study group had dry skin after washing (25.3%), desquamation in 0 case (0.0%), tightness in 21 cases (28.0%) and allergy in 0 case (0.0%). There were significant differences in the incidence of the above two groups (P <0.05) . The disinfection effect of two groups of surgeons can reach the standard of “disinfection technical specifications”, the total number of bacteria is less than or equal to 5 cfu / cm2, no pathogen is detected. Conclusion The brushless technique can meet the requirements of surgical hand disinfection, and can protect the hand nurses’ skin in the operating room.