两种血液透析器复用方法的应用效果分析  

作　　者：练桂英[1] 温振英[1] 李燕[1] 林丽华[1] 梁连卿[1] 陈春香[1] 黄翠兰[1] 

机构地区：[1]佛山市第一人民医院,广东佛山528000

出　　处：《现代临床护理》2010年第5期53-54,共2页Modern Clinical Nursing

摘　　要：目的探讨两种血液透析器复用方法的应用效果。方法选择80例采用复用血液透析器行血液透析患者,随机分为全自动复用法组和人工复用法组,每组各40例。透析后检测两组患者各生化指标情况和观察及了解两组患者透析不良反应情况及透析费用。结果透析后两组患者的尿素氮、肌酐清除率和尿素清除指数(KT/V值)比较,差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);两组患者无1例发生热源反应和漏血现象;采用全自动复用法与人工复用法患者每次平均透析费用分别为(479.95±3.03)元、(499.62±5.38)元,两种方法比较,t=-20.14,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义;采用全自动复用法与人工复用法每个复用耗时分别为(9.94±0.87)min、(24.95±9.28)min,两种方法比较,t=-20.72,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义,透析器复用方法采用全自动复用法的患者透析费用和复用耗时明显优于采用人工复用法。结论全自动透析器复用方法方便、快捷,能有效完成对透析器自动冲洗、检测及消毒,不仅生物相容性好,而且还能降低患者透析费用。Objective To explore the effectiveness of two kinds of repeated use of hemodialysers. Methods Eighty hematodialysis patients were randomly divided into two groups, 40 each in automatic repetition group and artificial repetition group. The two groups received two kinds of repeated use of hemodialysers, biochemical indicators, adverse effects and cost were compared between the two groups. Results No significant differences were found in urea nitrogen, creatinine clearance rate and urea cleasanee index after dialysis between the two groups （P 〉 0.05）. No heat source reaction or blood leakage occurred in the two groups. The average cost of each hemodialysis was （479.95 ± 3.03） RMB and （499.62 ± 5.38） RMB in the automatic repetition group and the artificial repetition group, respectively, and the difference was significant （P 〈 0.05）. It took 9.94 ± 0.87 rain and （24.95 ± 9.28） min for each repetition use in the automatic repetition group and the artificial repetition group, respectively, and the difference was significant （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Automatic hemodialyser, which earl wash, detect and sterilize automatically, has few adverse effects and good biocompatibility, and can reduce dialysis cost.

关 键 词：血液透析器 全自动复用法 手工复用法 血液透析 

分 类 号：R473.5[医药卫生—护理学]