出 处:《中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志》2022年第5期580-584,共5页China Journal of Emergency Resuscitation and Disaster Medicine
基 金:扬州市科技计划项目(编号:YZ2019147);全国哲学社会科学工作办公室,国家应急管理体系建设研究专项项目(编号:20VYJ068);苏北人民医院管理课题(编号:YYGL202110)。
摘 要:目的探讨苏北人民医院创伤中心成立对多发性损伤患者救治的影响。方法采用回顾性病例对照研究,分析2016年12月—2018年12月收治的损伤严重度评分(ISS)>16分的501例多发性损伤患者的临床资料。以苏北人民医院创伤中心成立后救治的286例患者为观察组,创伤中心成立前救治的215例患者为对照组。比较两组会诊医师到达抢救室时间、患者抢救室滞留时间、休克病人输血等待时间、患者择期手术术前住院日、总住院日、住院患者满意度、死亡率。结果观察组与对照组的急会诊到场达抢救室时间分别为(3.53±1.44)min、(5.69±1.95)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组与对照组的抢救室滞留时间分别为(116±77)min、(130±86)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组与对照组的输血等待时间分别为(67.83±10.15)min、(104.01±12.42)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组中出现休克89人,平均输血等待时间(67.83±10.15)min,对照组出现休克73人,平均输血时间(104.01±12.42)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组中81例患者行择期手术治疗,术前住院日为(8.83±4.89)d,对照组68例患者行择期手术治疗,术前住院日为(12.08±5.58)d,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。观察组与对照组患者总住院日分别为(17.38±5.21)d、(26.74±11.43)d,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。观察组与对照组的住院诊疗满意度分别为96%、90%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组与对照组的死亡率分别为2.5%、6.1%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论创伤中心的建立缩短了患者的抢救室滞留时间、抢救室输血等待时间,同时也降低了术前住院日、总住院日,减少了患者的总住院费用,降低了病死率,提高了患者满意度,值得推广。Objective To explore the influence of the establishment of the trauma center of Subei People's Hospital on the treatment of patients with multiple injuries.Methods A retrospective case-control study was used to analyze the clinical data of 501 patients with multiple injuries who were admitted to the hospital from December 2016 to December 2018 with an injury severity score(ISS)>16 points.286 patients treated after the establishment of the trauma center of Subei People's Hospital were taken as the observation group,and 215 patients treated before the establishment of the trauma center were taken as the control group.Comparing the two groups of consultation physicians'arrival time in the rescue room,patient staying in the rescue room,waiting time for blood transfusion in shock patients,hospital stay before elective surgery,total hospital stay,patient satisfaction,and mortality.Results The time to reach the emergency room for emergency consultation between the observation group and the control group was(3.53±1.44)min and(5.69±1.95)min,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The retention time in the rescue room of the observation group and the control group was(116±77)min and(130±86)min,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The blood transfusion waiting time of the observation group and the control group was(67.83±10.15)min and(104.01±12.42)min,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In the observation group,89 people suffered shock,and the average waiting time for blood transfusion was(67.83±10.15)min.In the control group,73 people suffered shock and the average blood transfusion time was(104.01±12.42)min.The difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In the observation group,81 patients underwent elective surgical treatment,the preoperative hospital stay was(8.83±4.89)days,and the 68 patients in the control group underwent elective surgery,the preoperative hospital stay was(12.08±5.58)days,the difference was
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...