卒中应急团队救护模式对急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓患者临床结局的影响  

Effect of stroke emergency team rescue on clinical outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis

作　　者：王强波 徐伟娜 董小参 Wang Qiangbo;Xu Weina;Dong Xiaoshen(Emergency Department,Zhengzhou Central Hospital,Zhengzhou 450007,China)

机构地区：[1]郑州市中心医院急诊科,郑州450007

出　　处：《保健医学研究与实践》2023年第8期85-88,共4页Health Medicine Research and Practice

摘　　要：目的探讨卒中应急团队救护模式对急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)静脉溶栓患者临床结局的影响,以期为临床治疗提供参考。方法本研究选取郑州市中心医院2020年3月—2021年3月收治的46例AIS患者为对照组,2021年4月—2022年4月收治的46例AIS患者为观察组。对照组患者采用常规救护模式进行静脉溶栓治疗,观察组患者采用卒中应急团队救护模式进行静脉溶栓治疗。比较2组患者急诊评估至出急诊时间、标本送检至出结果时间、进CT室检查到结束时间、CT检查结束至药物首推时间、进急诊至溶栓用药时间;比较溶栓后24 h及溶栓后3个月2组患者美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)及Fugl-Meyer运动量表(FMA)评分;比较溶栓后3个月,2组患者预后良好率。比较溶栓后3个月,2组患者预后情况。结果观察组患者急诊评估至出急诊时间、标本送检至出结果时间、进CT室检查至结束时间、CT检查结束至药物首推时间、进急诊至溶栓用药时间均短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。溶栓后24 h,2组患者NIHSS及FMA评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。溶栓后3个月,2组患者NIHSS评分低于溶栓后24 h,观察组低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);溶栓后3个月,2组患者FMA评分高于溶栓后24 h,观察组高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组患者预后良好率高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论卒中应急团队救护模式应用于AIS静脉溶栓患者救治中,可有效缩短各溶栓关键指标时间,改善神经及运动功能,提高预后良好率,值得推广应用。Objective This paper aims to investigate the effect of stroke emergency team rescue mode on the clinical outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke(AIS)treated with intravenous thrombolysis to provide evidence for clinical treatment.Methods In this study,46 AIS patients admitted to Zhengzhou Central Hospital from March 2020 to March 2021 were selected as the control group and 46 AIS patients admitted from April 2021 to April 2022 as the observation group.The patients in the control group were treated with intravenous thrombolysis using the conventional rescue mode;the patients in the observation group,intravenous thrombolysis using the stroke emergency team rescue mode.The time from emergency evaluation to emergency treatment,the time from specimen submission to laboratory results,the time from CT room examination to its completion,the time from CT examination to the first push of the drug,and the time from emergency treatment to thrombolytic medication were compared between the groups.The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale(NIHSS)and Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale(FMA)scores were compared between the groups at 24 h after thrombolysis and 3 months after thrombolysis.Moreover,the rate of favorable prognosis was compared between the groups at 3 months after thrombolysis.The prognosis of patients in the 2 groups three months after thrombolysis was compared.Results The time from emergency evaluation to emergency treatment,the time from specimen submission to laboratory results,the time from CT room examination to its completion,the time from CT examination to the first push of the drug,and the time from emergency treatment to thrombolytic medication in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group(P<0.05).At 24 h after thrombolysis,no significant difference was found in NIHSS and FMA scores between the groups(P>0.05).NIHSS score in the two groups at three months after thrombolysis was lower than that at 24 h after thrombolysis,the score was lower in the observation group than in

关 键 词：卒中应急团队救护模式 急性缺血性脑卒中 静脉溶栓 

分 类 号：R605.97[医药卫生—急诊医学]