论文部分内容阅读
目的:对神经内科患者压疮不同清创方法进行探索,对比其应用效果,以期为临床提供借鉴。方法:以我院收治的50例神经内科压疮患者作为本次研究对象,共计72处压疮,根据不同清创方法,分为自容清创组、保守性锐器清创组以及联合清创组,每组各24处,对比三组清创方法的清创时间、压疮愈合效果等指标。结果:经统计发现,在压疮愈合计分方面,三组患者在清创第7d、14d以及21d并无显著性差异(P>0.05),但联合清创组所需清创时间明显短于自容清创组与保守性锐气清创组(P<0.05),且差异具有统计学意义。而在愈合时间方面,联合清创组所需时间最短,自容清创组所需时间最长,三组差异具有显著差异(P<0.05),具有统计学意义。结论:联合清创在神经内科压疮患者中的应用最为理想,能够有效软化水解坏死组织,并进行逐次清除干净,从而有效确保清创操作的安全性,缩短清创时间,提高患者伤口愈合效果。
OBJECTIVE: To explore different debridement methods of pressure ulcer in patients with neurological diseases and to compare their application effects in order to provide reference for clinical practice. Methods: Fifty neurosurgical pressure ulcer patients admitted to our hospital were selected as the study objects. A total of 72 pressure ulcers were divided into self-contained debridement group, conservative decontamination debridement group, A group, each group of 24, compared the debridement time of three debridement methods, pressure ulcer healing and other indicators. Results: According to statistics, there was no significant difference between the three groups on the 7d, 14d and 21d of debridement in terms of pressure ulcer healing score (P> 0.05), however, the debridement time required by the combination debridement group was significantly shorter than Self-content debridement group and conservative EQ group (P <0.05), and the difference was statistically significant. In terms of healing time, the combined debridement group required the shortest time, the self-contained debridement group took the longest time, and the difference between the three groups was significant (P <0.05), with statistical significance. Conclusion: The combination of debridement in neurosurgical patients with pressure ulcer in the most ideal application, can effectively soften the hydrolytic necrotic tissue, and remove one by one clean, so as to effectively ensure the safety of debridement, shorten the time of debridement and improve the wound healing of patients .