本文選題：血栓栓塞 + 經(jīng)外周靜脈置入中心靜脈導(dǎo)管��； 參考：《蚌埠醫(yī)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)》2016年04期

【摘要】：目的:觀察集束化護(hù)理對(duì)腫瘤患者經(jīng)外周靜脈置入中心靜脈導(dǎo)管(PICC)發(fā)生深靜脈血栓的療效。方法:選擇2013年收治的64例腫瘤PICC置管患者為對(duì)照組給予常規(guī)護(hù)理,2014年收治的68例為觀察組給予集束化護(hù)理。觀察2組患者PICC深靜脈血栓的發(fā)生情況。結(jié)果:(1)穿刺靜脈與血栓發(fā)生的關(guān)系。選擇頭靜脈:觀察組7例(10.3%),對(duì)照組28例(43.8%);選擇貴要靜脈:觀察組61例(89.3%),對(duì)照組36例(56.2%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.01)。頭靜脈置管發(fā)生血栓例數(shù):觀察組1例(14.2%),對(duì)照組5例(17.9%);貴要靜脈置管發(fā)生血栓例數(shù):觀察組1例(14.2%),對(duì)照組6例(16.7%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。(2)置管時(shí)間與血栓發(fā)生的關(guān)系。置管2周:觀察組1例(1.5%),對(duì)照組8例(12.5%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);2個(gè)月:觀察組3例(4.4%),對(duì)照組10例(15.6%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);全程:觀察組3例(4.4%),對(duì)照組12例(18.8%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.01)。(3)導(dǎo)管尖端位置與血栓發(fā)生的關(guān)系。一次置管到位:觀察組65例(95.5%),對(duì)照組53例(82.8%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);二次調(diào)整后到位:觀察組67例(98.5%),對(duì)照組61例(95.3%),差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);導(dǎo)管調(diào)整后血栓發(fā)生例數(shù):觀察組1例(1.5%),對(duì)照組8例(12.5%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。結(jié)論:采取集束化護(hù)理可降低PICC導(dǎo)致的深靜脈血栓的發(fā)生率,值得在臨床上推廣。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the effect of cluster nursing on deep venous thrombosis (DVT) caused by central venous catheter (PICC) in patients with tumor. Methods: 64 patients with PICC in 2013 were selected as control group and 68 cases in 2014 as observation group. To observe the occurrence of PICC deep venous thrombosis in two groups. Results: (1) the relationship between venipuncture and thrombosis. There were 7 cases (10.3%) in the observation group and 28 cases (43.8%) in the control group, 61 cases (89.3%) in the observation group and 36 cases (56.2%) in the control group (P0.01). There were 1 case (14.2%) in the observation group and 5 cases (17.9%) in the control group, and 1 case (14.2%) in the observation group and 6 cases (16.7%) in the control group. The difference was statistically significant (P0.05) between the time of catheterization and thrombosis. 2 weeks: observation group 1 case (1.5%), control group 8 cases (12.5%), difference was statistically significant (P0.05); 2 months: observation group 3 cases (4.4%), control group 10 cases (15.6%), the difference was statistically significant (P0.05); whole course: observation group 3 cases (4.4%), control group 12 cases (18.8%), the difference was statistically significant. Clinical significance (P0.01). (3) the relationship between the tip position of catheter and thrombosis. There were 65 cases (95.5%) in the observation group and 53 cases (82.8%) in the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P0.05), 67 cases (98.5%) in the observation group and 61 cases (95.3%) in the control group after secondary adjustment, the difference was not statistically significant (P0.05); 1 case (1.5%) in the observation group and 8 cases (12.5%) in the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). Conclusion: cluster nursing can reduce the incidence of deep venous thrombosis caused by PICC, and it is worth popularizing in clinic.
【作者單位】： 蚌埠醫(yī)學(xué)院第一附屬醫(yī)院腫瘤內(nèi)科;
【分類號(hào)】：R473.73

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 龔慧玲;;集束化護(hù)理方案預(yù)防呼吸機(jī)相關(guān)性肺炎40例臨床觀察[J];中國(guó)民族民間醫(yī)藥;2014年08期

2 李娟;;集束化護(hù)理措施預(yù)防呼吸機(jī)相關(guān)性肺炎效果觀察[J];中國(guó)消毒學(xué)雜志;2013年06期

3 環(huán)曉鋒;杜娟;吳春燕;;集束化護(hù)理在呼吸機(jī)相關(guān)性肺炎中的運(yùn)用研究[J];實(shí)用臨床醫(yī)藥雜志;2011年22期

4 韓麗麗;賈銳;;集束化護(hù)理在預(yù)防卒中相關(guān)性肺炎患者中的應(yīng)用[J];大家健康(學(xué)術(shù)版);2014年10期

5 宛麗;于巧秀;王紅;;集束化護(hù)理應(yīng)用于預(yù)防手術(shù)部位感染的探討[J];護(hù)士進(jìn)修雜志;2014年14期

6 林雪英;;集束化護(hù)理在ICU壓瘡患者中的應(yīng)用[J];齊魯護(hù)理雜志;2014年15期

7 郝美秀;;集束化護(hù)理干預(yù)的臨床應(yīng)用[J];疾病監(jiān)測(cè)與控制;2014年06期

8 ;[J];;年期

，

本文編號(hào)：2087278