检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]南京市急救中心,江苏南京210003 [2]解放军四五四医院,江苏南京210002
出 处:《现代医学》2014年第12期1425-1429,共5页Modern Medical Journal
摘 要:目的:总结50例危重症患者远距离转运过程中的风险因素,提出防范措施。方法:回顾性分析50例危重症患者从接诊至远距离转运送达目的地的全过程,归纳总结出较常见的风险因素,探讨防范这些风险因素的具体措施。结果:50例危重症患者中男27例,女23例;年龄最大82岁,最小19岁,平均58.7岁;放弃治疗8例,送回当地医院7例,转入南京市三级医院35例;格拉斯哥昏迷评分法≤8分者42例(84.00%),气管插管者26例(52.00%),转运成功45例,途中死亡5例。结论:患者病情非常危重、随车医护人员整体素质欠缺、转运前的准备工作不充分、对患者病情缺乏全面评估、医患沟通不足等是远距离转运过程中较常见的风险因素。Objective: To summarize the risk factor of critically ill patients in long distance transport processes and it's prevention. Methods: The whole processes of 50 cases of critically ill patients from admissions to long- distance transport to destinations was retrospectively analysed and the more common risk factors were summarized , specific measures to prevent these risk factors were discussed. Results: In the 50 cases of critically ill patients (27 male and 23 female cases), the oldest was 82 years old and the youngest 19 years old, average 58.7 years old. Among them, 8 cases were abandoned treatment, backed to the local hospital in 7 cases, 35 cases turned to Nanjing tertiary hospitals. There were 42 cases ( 84. 00% ) intubation (52. 00% ), 45 cases transfer success, 5 cases die Glasgow coma scale ≤ 8 points, 26 cases tracheal d on the way. Conclusion: The patient's condition is very critical, overall accompanying medical staff is lack of quality, the preparatory work before delivery is not sufficient, the lack of a comprehensive assessment of the patient's condition, such as a lack of communication between doctors and patients in long-distance transport are the more common risk factors.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.117.106.206