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
作 者:白永斌
出 处:《中国继续医学教育》2015年第32期102-103,共2页China Continuing Medical Education
摘 要:目的对3种内固定治疗股骨髁间粉碎性骨折的临床效果进行比较。方法抽取我院的96例股骨髁间粉碎性骨折患者,随机分为A、B、C三组,A组患者给予动力髁部螺丝内固定治疗,B组患者给予髁支持钢板内固定治疗,C组患者给予普通钢板内固定治疗,对三组患者的治疗效果进行比较。结果三组患者的治疗效果差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对股骨髁间粉碎性骨折患者进行治疗的过程中,三种内固定的治疗效果相当。Objective To compare the clinical effect of 3 kinds of internal fixation for the treatment of femoral condylar comminuted fracture.Methods 96 cases of femoral condylar comminuted fracture patients were randomly divided into A, B, C three groups, A group of patients with the dynamic condylar screw internal fixation treatment, B group of patients treated with condylar support plate, C group were treated with ordinary steel plate, the treatment effect of three groups of patients were compared.Results The difference of the treatment effect was not obvious in the three groups(P〉0.05). Conclusion In the treatment of the femoral condyle comminuted fracture, three kinds of internal fixation of the treatment effect is almost the same.
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:216.73.216.49