检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]广东医学院附属医院呼吸内科,湛江524001
出 处:《中国实用医药》2008年第31期18-20,共3页China Practical Medicine
摘 要:目的观察比较胸腔穿刺抽液术及胸腔置管引流术的疗效。方法选择50例确诊为大、中量的胸积液患者,分穿刺抽液及置管引流两组,统一表格记录观察,将所得资料作统计分析。结果共穿刺100次,均一次成功;住院时间最长为14 d;50例痊愈出院无并发症;观察指标结果:胸腔置管术优于胸腔穿刺抽液术(P<0.01)。结论胸腔置管引流简单安全、效果好;减轻患者经济负担及痛苦;减少医护工作量。Objective Observation and comparison the effects of liquid pumped chest puncture and chest tube drainage. Methods Choice of 50 patients which diagnosed large or middle of pleural effusion. Divided into puncture pumping liquid and purchase drainage, observation records information for statistical analysis. Results Puncture a total of 100, were a success;The most prolonged hospitalization for 14 days ;50 patients recovered without complications;Observations: chest tube drainage is better than liquid pumped chest puncture (P 〈 0.01 ). Conclusion Chest tube drainage is simple, safe and effective;Reduce the financial burden and suffering of patients ; Reduce the workload of health care.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.249