PICC置管后不同敷贴固定对接触性皮炎的影响及成本-效果分析  

Cost-effectiveness analysis of three different dressings used after PICC catheterization

作　　者：王敬[1] 高玉芳[1] 陈伟芬[2] 魏丽丽[1] 张宏岩[1] 

机构地区：[1]青岛大学医学院附属医院护理部,山东省266003 [2]青岛大学医学院附属医院肿瘤科,山东省266003

出　　处：《中国护理管理》2011年第3期88-90,共3页Chinese Nursing Management

基　　金：2009年山东医药卫生科技发展计划项目(2009HZ024)

摘　　要：目的:探讨3M、IV3000、水胶体敷贴3种常用敷贴在PICC置管术后固定导管时局部皮肤接触性皮炎的发病率及其成本-效果。方法:选取符合标准的238名患者为研究对象,并随机分为3组:3M敷贴组(A组)、IV3000组(B组)、水胶体敷贴组(C组),进行对照研究。成本只计算材料成本,效果以接触性皮炎的发生率为评价标准。结果:3种敷贴发生接触性皮炎的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组发生率最高(P<0.05),B组与C组发生率的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);A组成本最低,B组次之,C组最高。结论:3种敷贴(3M、IV3000和水胶体敷贴)中,经成本-效果分析,在不超过预算成本的基础上推荐优先选择水胶体或IV3000敷贴。Objective： To investigate the cost-effectiveness of the three common used dressings such as 3M, IV3000, hydrocolloid dressing used after PICC catheterization. Method：A prospective randomized study was conducted on 238 patients which was divided in to three groups as 3M （group A）, IV3000 （group B）, hydrocolloid dressing （group C）. We only calculated the cost of the materials and paid attention to the effect which was calculated by nonevent rate of contact dermatitis .Result： There were differences in the incidence of contact dermatitis among three patient groups which used three kinds of dressings （P0.05）. The incidence of group A was the highest and the cost was the lowest . There was not difference between the incidence of group B and group C . Conclusion： According to the cost-effectiveness of the three common used dressings, we should choose IV3000 firstly if we did not exceed the budget.

关 键 词：PICC 敷贴 接触性皮炎 成本-效果 

分 类 号：R473.6[医药卫生—护理学]