APSIC预防中心静脉导管相关性感染指南在ICU的实践

发布时间：2018-02-24 10:29

  本文关键词： 指南 重症医学科 中心静脉导管 导管相关性血流感染 随机试验　出处：《广东医学》2017年16期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：目的探讨基于亚太感染控制协会(APSIC)预防中心静脉导管相关性血流感染指南在重症医学科患者中的实践效果。方法根据APSIC指南,结合参与研究的重症医学科实际情况,找出最佳循证证据及最佳临床实践路径,设计干预方案。选取观察组139例,对照组127例,观察组基于APSIC预防中心静脉导管相关性感染(CRBSI)指南进行干预,对照组采用常规操作。分析两组干预措施对预防CRBSI的效果,数据采用SPSS 20.0统计软件进行分析。结果观察组与对照组是否发生CRBSI对照分析显示,形成完整诊断的CRBSI差异无统计学意义(P=0.248),疑似CRBSI的对比差异有统计学意义(P=0.022),静脉血栓(P=0.338)、其他并发症(P=0.138)差异无统计学意义。结论基于APSIC指南的循证干预并不能明显改善使用中心静脉导管过程中发生的并发症,但是,基于指南的实践干预组发生CRBSI的患者数少于对照组,说明基于APSIC指南的实践干预是有价值的,特别是Ⅰ级证据。
[Abstract]:Objective to explore the practical effect of the guidelines for the prevention of central venous catheter-related blood flow infection based on the Asia-Pacific Association for infection Control (APSI) in patients with severe medical department. Methods according to the APSIC guidelines, combined with the actual situation of the intensive medicine department involved in the study, To find out the best evidence-based evidence and the best clinical practice path and to design the intervention scheme, 139 cases in the observation group and 127 cases in the control group were selected. The intervention in the observation group was based on the APSIC guidelines for the prevention of central catheter related infection. In the control group, routine operation was used to analyze the effect of two intervention measures on the prevention of CRBSI. The data were analyzed by SPSS 20.0 statistical software. Results the CRBSI was compared between the observation group and the control group. There was no significant difference in CRBSI with complete diagnosis (P < 0. 248), but there was no significant difference in suspected CRBSI (P = 0. 022), venous thrombosis (P = 0. 338), other complications (P = 0. 138). Conclusion Evidence-based intervention based on APSIC guidelines can not be significantly corrected. Complications arising from the good use of central venous catheters, However, the number of patients with CRBSI in the Guide-based practice intervention group was lower than that in the control group, indicating that the practice intervention based on the APSIC guidelines was valuable, especially the first-degree evidence.
【作者单位】： 广东医科大学附属医院心血管中心;广东医科大学附属医院手术室;广东医科大学附属医院放射科;广东医科大学附属医院重症医学科;广东医科大学附属医院护理教研室;
【基金】：湛江市财政资金科研专项备用经费项目(编号:2014C01029)
【分类号】：R473
，

本文编号：1529901