两种补液方法院前急救治疗创伤性休克的临床研究  

Different Fluid Infusion Methods in Pre-hospital Emergency Treatment of Traumatic Shock

作　　者：张贵田[1] 潘爱群[1] 刘国海[1] 刘庆明[1] 马福来[1] 

机构地区：[1]河北医科大学附属唐山市工人医院,河北省唐山市063000

出　　处：《中国全科医学》2010年第21期2363-2364,共2页Chinese General Practice

摘　　要：目的探讨传统补液法和亚休克疗法用于院前急救治疗创伤性休克的临床效果。方法 282例创伤性休克患者分为两组,分别采用传统补液法和亚休克疗法进行抢救,对比分析两组患者72h病死率及严重并发症发生率。结果传统补液组患者72h病死率为35.32%,较亚休克疗法组的18.52%明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。传统补液组严重并发症发生率为40.80%,较亚休克疗法组的22.22%明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论传统补液组72h病死率及严重并发症发生率均较高,在院前急救治疗创伤性休克时,应首选亚休克疗法,以提高救治效果。Objective To explore the clinical effectiveness of different fluid infusion methods in pre-hospital emergency treatment of traumatic shock.Methods Two hundred eighty-two traumatic shock patients were divided into groups A （receiving traditional infusion）,B （receiving subshock therapy）.The incidence of severe complications and 72 h mortality were comparatively analyzed.Results The 72 h mortality of group A was 35.32%,significantly higher than that of group B （18.52%）（P0.05）.The incidence of severe complications was higher in group A （40.80%） than in group B （22.22%） （P0.05）.Conclusion Traditional fluid infusion group have a relatively high 72 h mortality and incidence of severe complications.Subshock therapy should be chosen first to improve the treatment results in pre-hospital emergency treatment of traumatic shock.

关 键 词：休克 创伤性 急救医疗服务 液体疗法 

分 类 号：R541.64[医药卫生—心血管疾病]