摘要
目的通过临床观察比较两种方法治疗PICC穿刺点感染的效果。方法对本科室PICC置管患者中出现穿刺点感染者28例分为两组观察比较其疗效;A组采用0.5%活力碘局部湿敷穿刺点及周围院B组采用百多邦涂抹在穿刺点周围,观察3~5 d,记录穿刺点感染情况。结果 A组治疗总有效率为85.7%;B组治疗总有效率为64.2%。 A组治疗效果及治愈时间优于B组。结论0.5%活力碘局部湿敷PICC穿刺点感染疗效好,且治疗时间缩短。
Objective Through clinical observation to compare two methods for the treatment of PICC puncture point infection.Methods Our department in June 2011 to May 2013 in patients with PICC catheter puncture point infection 28 cases are divided into two groups compare its curative ef ect;Dynamic group A with 0.5%iodine partial wet apply the puncture point and the surrounding:group B with hundreds states apply around the puncture point,observation of 3~5 days,record the puncture point infection status.Results Group A 3 days treatment ef ective rate of 78.5%,5 days treatment ef ective rate of 33.3%,the total ef ective rate was 85.7%;Group B 3 days treatment effective rate of 28.5%,5 days treatment ef ective rate was 50%,total ef ective rate was 64.2%.Therapeutic ef ect of group A is bet er than that of group B and cure time.Conclusion 0.5%energy iodine partial wet apply PICC puncture point infection curative ef ect good,and shorten the treatment time.
作者
王娟
WANG Juan(Department of Galactophore,The Third Hospital of Nanchang City,Nanchang 330009,Jiangxi,China)
