两种不同术式治疗成人股骨干骨折术后护理记录及随访记录的回顾性研究  

A retrospective study of postoperative nursing records and follow-up records of two different surgical methods in adults with femoral shaft fractures

作　　者：陈铭青 欧丽珍[1] 区佩诗 谢晓红 CHEN Mingqing;OU Lizhen;OU Peishi;XIE Xiaohong(DepartmentⅠof Orthopedics,the People's Hospital of Gaoming,Guangdong,Foshan 528500,China)

机构地区：[1]广东省佛山市高明区人民医院骨一科,广东佛山528500

出　　处：《中国医药科学》2020年第23期160-163,共4页China Medicine And Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的比较切开复位髓内钉固定(开髓组)及闭合复位髓内钉固定(闭合组)两种术式治疗成人股骨干骨折的早期及远期疗效。方法回顾性分析自2012年9月~2018年9月我院采用两种术式治疗且获得随访的80例股骨干骨折患者的术后护理及随访记录,开髓组40例,闭合组40例,比较两组护理记录的手术时间、术后出血量、住院期间功能恢复评分(早期)、伤口愈合时间,以及随访记录的扶拐行走时间、骨折愈合时间、HSS功能评分。评价两种术式的康复过程及康复结果。结果护理记录:两组手术时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05):开髓组比闭合组术后出血量更多,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05),住院期间功能恢复评分(早期):开髓组低,闭合组高,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。伤口愈合时间:两组伤口愈合时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。随访记录:扶拐时间,闭合组比髓内钉固定的扶拐时间要短,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。骨折愈合时间,开髓组出现2例骨不连患者,闭合组全部一期愈合,愈合时间最短,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05),HSS功能评分,开髓组得分低,闭合组得分高,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论股骨干骨折闭合复位髓内钉固定治疗相较于切开复位髓内钉固定治疗在康复的过程和预后两方面均有显著的优势,值得临床推广和应用。Objective To compare the early and long-term effects of two different surgical methods-open reduction intramedullary nail fixation(open group) and closed reduction intramedullary nail fixation(closed group) for the treatment of adults with femoral shaft fractures. Methods The postoperative nursing records and follow-up records of 80 patients with femoral shaft fractures who were treated with two surgical methods and followed up in our hospital from September 2012 to September 2018 were retrospectively studied. There were 40 patients in the open group and 40 patients in the closed group. Operation time, bleeding volume, functional recovery score(early stage) during hospitalization, wound healing time, crutch-holding walking time, fracture healing time and HSS functional score recorded in the follow-up were compared between the two groups. The rehabilitation process and results of the two surgical methods were evaluated. Results There was no statistically significant difference in nursing record and operation time between the two groups(P > 0.05). The bleeding volume in the open group was higher than that in the closed group, and the difference was statistically significant(P < 0.05). The functional recovery score during hospitalization(early stage) in the open group was lower than that in the closed group, with statistically significant differences(P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in wound healing time between the two groups(P > 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in crutch-holding walking time and follow-up record between the two groups(P < 0.05). Fracture healing time: 2 patients of nonunion occurred in the open group, and all patients healed at first stage with the shortest healing time in the closed group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P < 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in HSS function score between the two groups(P < 0.05), and HSS function score in the open group was lower than that in the closed gr

关 键 词：股骨干骨折 髓内钉 切开复位 闭合复位 护理记录 随访记录 

分 类 号：R473.6[医药卫生—护理学]