论文部分内容阅读
导乐分娩镇痛仪联合利多卡因宫颈局部注射用于分娩镇痛的临床效果观察。方法是将130例产妇随机分为三组:A组(50例)为使用导乐分娩镇痛仪联合1%的利多卡因进行镇痛;B组(40例)为单纯使用导乐分娩镇痛仪镇痛;C组(40例)为空白对照。观察镇痛效果、产程时间、分娩方式、产后出血等。结果 A组、B组均有镇痛作用,与C组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01),A组镇痛效果好于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。A组活跃期为(413.4±15.8)min、第二产程(57.6±2.6)min,均明显短于B组(509.4±13.5)min和(99.6±3.5)min、C组(518.8±15.2)min和(100.8±4.5)min(P值均<0.05),A组总产程(1308.4±36.1)min短于C组(1519±26.1)min(P<0.05)。结论导乐分娩镇痛仪具有良好的镇痛效果,对母儿均无不良影响,操作简单方便,产妇乐于接受,不失为一种理想的分娩镇痛方法,适于在基层单位推广使用。
Clinical Effect of Drainage Analgesia Combined with Lidocaine Local Injection on Labor Analgesia. The method was to randomly divide 130 maternal women into three groups: Group A (50 patients) received analgesia with delivery analgesia combined with 1% lidocaine; Group B (40 patients) Pain analgesic; C group (40 cases) as a blank control. Observe the analgesic effect, labor process, mode of delivery, postpartum hemorrhage and so on. Results The analgesic effect was found in both groups A and B, which were significantly different from those in group C (P <0.01). The analgesic effect in group A was better than that in group B (P <0.01). The active phase of group A was (413.4 ± 15.8) min and the second stage of labor was (57.6 ± 2.6) min, which was significantly shorter than that of group B (509.4 ± 13.5) min and (99.6 ± 3.5) (100.8 ± 4.5) min (P <0.05). The total length of labor in group A (1308.4 ± 36.1) min was shorter than that in group C (1519 ± 26.1) min (P <0.05). Conclusion Drip analgesia analgesia with good analgesic effect on the mother and child have no adverse effects, easy operation, maternal willing to accept, after all, an ideal method of labor analgesia, suitable for promotion and use in the grass-roots units.