两种动静脉内瘘穿刺点压迫止血法的对比研究  

The Research of Two Compression Hemostasises of Puncture Point in Arteriovenous Fistula

作　　者：邓锐[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川省人民医院,四川省成都市邮政编码610072

出　　处：《天津护理》1999年第6期230-232,共3页Tianjin Journal of Nursing

摘　　要：将我中心的52例维持性血液透析患者随机分成两组,分别采用手指压迫止血法和弹性绷带压迫止血法,并观察了6个月1560例次内瘘压迫止血所用的时间及并发症。结果:手指压迫止血法所用的时间(10.98±3.82min)明显短于弹性绷带压迫止血所用的时问(49.67±19.98mm),P<0.01。且穿刺部位的出血、血肿并发症的发生率,手指压迫止血法(2.38％、0.71％)明显低于弹性绷带压迫止血法(5.43％、2.51％),P<0.01。其结果显示,就减少内瘘的并发症和延长内瘘的使用寿命而言,手指压迫止血法有明显的优越性。Comparison between two compression hemostasises of puncture point in arteriovenous fistula. Methods 52 patients treated with maintainance hemodialysis were divided into two groups according to two compression hemostasis with fingers and elastic bandages. The time and complications of 1560 cases of compression hemostasises of arteriovenous fistula had been observed for 6 months. Results The average time of compression hemostasis with fingers (10. 98±3. 82min) is singnificantly shorter than that with elastic bandages (49.67±19.98min), P<0.01. the complication incidences of hemorrhage and hematoma of the puncture point, the former (2. 38 %, 0.71%) are apparently lower than the latter (5.43%,2.51%), P<0.01. Conclusions The compression hemostasis with fingers is obviously superior to with elastic bandages in the complication incidences and lengthen the time of fistula.

关 键 词：动静脉内瘘 穿刺点 压迫止血法 血液透析 护理 

分 类 号：R459.5[医药卫生—治疗学] R472.9[医药卫生—临床医学]