术中综合保温方案对介入室患者术后感染的影响

发布时间：2018-05-02 15:16

本文选题：综合保温 + 介入室　；参考：《中华医院感染学杂志》2017年06期

【摘要】：目的探讨术中综合保温方案对介入室患者术后感染的影响,以有效预防介入手术患者术后感染。方法选取2015年1月-2016年6月在医院行介入手术的患者1038例为干预组,实施综合保温干预方案;选取2013年7月-2014年12月在医院行介入手术的患者1012例为对照组,实施常规保温方案;比较干预前后两组患者术前30min、手术开始后60min及手术后患者体温变化情况、手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、感染发生率及病原菌构成比例。结果对照组患者共有62例发生感染,感染率为6.13%;干预组患者共有8例,感染率为0.77%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.01);两组患者体温在术前30min均正常,差异无统计学意义;实施综合保温方案干预后,干预组在手术开始后60min及手术结束时体温与术前比较无差异,对照组患者在手术开始后60min及手术结束时体温均显著低于术前,且与干预组比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.01)。两组患者手术时间及术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义,对照组患者住院时间明显比干预组长,与干预组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。结论综合保温方案可有效维持患者围术期体温,缩短住院时间,降低介入手术治疗患者术后感染发生率。
[Abstract]:Objective to investigate the effect of comprehensive heat preservation during operation on postoperative infection in interventional room patients and to effectively prevent postoperative infection in patients undergoing interventional surgery. Methods 1038 patients undergoing interventional surgery in hospital from January 2015 to June 2016 were selected as intervention group and 1012 patients who underwent interventional surgery in hospital from July 2013 to December 2014 were selected as control group. Before and after intervention, the changes of body temperature, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, infection rate and the proportion of pathogenic bacteria were compared between the two groups before and after the intervention. Results there were 62 cases of infection in the control group, and 8 cases in the intervention group, the infection rate was 0.77, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.01), the temperature of the two groups was normal in preoperative 30min, the difference was not statistically significant. There was no difference in 60min and body temperature at the end of operation between the intervention group and the control group after the intervention of comprehensive heat preservation scheme. The 60min and the body temperature at the end of the operation in the control group were significantly lower than those before the operation. Compared with the intervention group, the difference was statistically significant (P 0.01). There was no significant difference in the operation time and the amount of blood loss between the two groups. The hospitalization time of the patients in the control group was significantly longer than that of the intervention group, and the difference was statistically significant compared with the intervention group (P 0.01). Conclusion the comprehensive heat preservation scheme can effectively maintain the perioperative body temperature, shorten the hospitalization time and reduce the incidence of postoperative infection in patients undergoing interventional surgery.
【作者单位】：承德市中心医院导管室;承德市中心医院监察室;承德市中心医院心内科;
【基金】：河北省卫生厅医学科学基金资助研究项目(zd20140393) 承德市科学技术研究与发展计划基金资助项目(2011210031)
【分类号】：R473

【相似文献】