机构地区:[1]浙江省桐庐县第一人民医院急诊科,311500
出 处:《中华全科医学》2015年第12期2060-2062,共3页Chinese Journal of General Practice
摘 要:目的探讨护理质量指标管理应用于急危重症患者的有效性。方法自2013年1月—2014年4月期间桐庐县第一人民医院在急诊科实施护理质量指标管理(包括并发症控制、急救时间等),选取期间接受护理的400例急危重症患者作为干预组;选取此前1年未实施护理质量指标管理的400例急危重症患者作为对照组。2组患者均按照纳入标准和排除标准严格选取,且2组一般资料具有可比性。统计2组患者急救时间、住院时间和急救费用及预后情况,以及深静脉导管相关性血流感染(CRBSI)、呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)、留置尿管相关性感染(CAUTI)等指标的发生率。结果干预组患者急救时间、急救费用和住院时间分别为(18.8±5.2)min、(2398.8±264.5)元和(14.7±5.3)d,对照组分别为(34.9±11.3)min、(3687.3±644.5)元和(22.5±6.2)d,干预组急救时间、急救费用和住院时间均明显小于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);对照组CRBSI、VAP和CAUTI发生率分别为4.5%(18/400)、4.0%(16/400)和6.0%(24/400),干预组为0.8%(3/400)、1.3%(5/400)和1.5%(6/400),观察组CRBSI、VAP和CAUTI发生率均明显低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论护理质量指标管理应用于急危重症患者的护理能明显缩短急救时间和住院时间,减少抢救费用,且能降低各项并发症指标,值得在临床上进一步推广。Objective To research the effectiveness of quality index in nursing management of critically ill patients in emergency department. Methods The nursing managements based on the quality control index were carried out on 400 critically ill patients in the department of our hospital from January 2013 to April 2014( intervention group); 400 critically ill patients receiving the routine care one year ago were selected as the control group. All patients met the strict inclusion /exclusion criteria,and the general information of both groups was comparable. The emergency treatment time,hospitalization time and emergency treatment expenses,as well as the incidence of deep venous catheter-related bloodstream infections( CRBSI),ventilator-associated pneumonia( VAP) and indwelling catheter-related infections( CAUTI) in the two groups were documented. Results The emergency treatment time,emergency treatment expenses and hospitalization time in the intervention group were( 18. 8 ± 5. 2) min,( 2398. 8 ± 264. 5) Yuan and( 14. 7 ± 5. 3) d,respectively,while in the control group was( 34. 9 ± 11. 3) min,( 3687. 3 ± 644. 5) Yuan and( 22. 5 ± 6. 2) d,respectively. The emergency treatment time,emergency treatment expenses and hospitalization time in the intervention group was significantly lower than those in the control group,the difference was statistically significant( P〈0. 05); CRBSI,VAP and CAUTI rates in intervention group were 4. 5%( 18 /400),4. 0%( 16 /400) and 6. 0%( 24 /400),respectively,while in the control group were0. 8%( 3 /400),1. 3%( 5 /400) and 1. 5%( 6 /400),respectively. CRBSI,VAP and CAUTI rates in the intervention group was significantly lower than those in the control group,the difference was statistically significant( P〈0. 05). Conclusion The nursing managements based on the quality control index in the emergency department for the critically ill patients can significantly shorten emergency treatment time and hospitalization time,re
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...