应用改良塞丁格技术行PICC置管的2种不同切皮方法临床效果比较观察  

The clinical effect comparative observation of 2 kinds nonintact method in PICC catheter applied by the modified seldinger technique

作　　者：郑小凤[1] 吴雪梅[1] 龚正荣[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川省人民医院草堂病区妇三科,成都市610072

出　　处：《临床合理用药杂志》2013年第10期31-32,共2页Chinese Journal of Clinical Rational Drug Use

摘　　要：目的比较观察应用改良塞丁格技术行外周置入中心静脉导管(PICC)的2种不同切皮方法的临床效果。方法将820例需行PICC置管患者据切皮方法的不同随机分为纵切组338例和横切组482例。比较2组出血量及皮肤淤血、手指肿胀、静脉炎的发生情况。结果纵切组置管时和置管后4、24h及1周时的出血量低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);置管后24h、1周皮肤淤血发生率低于横切组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论纵切法可有效减少置管过程中的出血量及置管后皮下淤血的发生,能更快地促进切口愈合。Objective To compare the clinical effect of 2 kinds nonintact method in PICC catheter applied by the modified seldinger technique. Methods 820 eases patients who needed PICC catheter were randomly divided into slitting group（338 eases） and crosscutting group（482 cases）. After treatment,compared the effect of two group. Results The bleed- ing volume of slitting group on catheter time and 4,24h and I week after catheter insertion were less than that of erosscutting group,the difference was statistically significant（P 〈0.05）. The skin bruising of slitting group on 24h and 1 week after cathe- ter insertion were better than that of crosscutting group, the difference was statistically significant （P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion The slitting method can reduce the bleeding volume and skin bruising, and can promote the woudn hesling.

关 键 词：改良塞丁格技术 中心静脉导管 切皮 出血量 

分 类 号：R472[医药卫生—护理学]