论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨直式采血针与蝶翼针采血针在外周静脉采血中的应用价值。方法选取2016年7月—9月北京大学国际医院门诊患者2000例,按采血方式不同分为直式采血针组与蝶翼针采血针组,各1000例。比较两组患者一次采血量准确性、标本溶血情况、穿刺疼痛程度及采血耗时。结果直式采血针组患者一次采血量准确性比例明显高于蝶翼针采血针组,标本溶血比例明显低于蝶翼针采血针组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);直式采血针组患者穿刺疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分明显低于蝶翼针采血针组,采血耗时明显短于蝶翼针采血针组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。结论针对门诊采血者使用直式针采血其采血量更准确,标本溶血发生率更低,患者疼痛程度更轻,耗时更短。
Objective To investigate the value of straight lancet and lancet needle lancet in peripheral venous blood collection. Methods A total of 2000 outpatients from Peking University International Hospital from July to September 2016 were selected and divided into direct lancet group and lancetillar needle group according to different blood sampling method, each with 1000 cases. Blood samples were collected for accuracy of blood collection, hemolysis, puncture pain and blood sampling time. Results The accuracy of blood sampling volume in direct lancing group was significantly higher than that in lancet needle lancet group, and the proportion of hemolytic specimen was significantly lower than that in lanceole needle lancet group (all P <0.05). The VAS score of the lancet group was significantly lower than that of the lancet needle lancet group, and the blood sampling time was significantly shorter than that of the lancet needle lancet group (all P <0.05) . Conclusion For blood sampling in outpatient clinics, blood sampling with straight needles is more accurate, the incidence of hemolysis in specimens is lower, and the pain degree is lighter and takes less time.