摘要
目的探讨不同定位方法行臂丛神经阻滞的临床效果。方法行择期上肢手术的患者随机分成超声引导组28例(Ⅰ组)、神经刺激组30例(Ⅱ组)、传统方法组30例(Ⅲ组),局麻药品均使用2%盐酸普鲁卡因30ml。分析臂丛神经麻醉完成时间、阻滞起效时间及麻醉效果。结果超声引导组麻醉完成用时最少、神经刺激组稍长,传统组用时最多;而阻滞起效时间超声引导组最短,传统组起效时间最长,三组比较差异明显(P<0.01)。超声引导组、神经刺激组、传统方法组麻醉效果比较优等率分别是:100.00%、90.00%、76.67%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);三组并发症比较,差异无显著意义(P>0.05)。结论超声引导下进行臂丛神经阻滞,比神经刺激器及传统方法的阻滞,起效时间短,更安全有效。
Objective To study the clinical effect of different positioning methods line brachial plexus nerve block. Methods Patients who will line elective period upper extremity surgery, were randomly divided into ultrasonic guidance group 30 cases （group Ⅰ）, nerve stimulation group 30 cases （Ⅱ group）, the traditional method group 30 cases （Ⅲ group）, local anesthesia drugs are usd with2% procaine hydrochloride 30 ml. Than effect of the brachial plexus anesthesia completion time, block onset time and anesthetic were analyzed. Results Ultrasonic guidance group of anesthesia completed at least, nerve stimulation group is a bit long, traditional teeching group; And block onset time in ultrasound guidance group was the shortest, and work time in traditional group was the longest.The differences were significant in the three groups （P〈0.01）.Superior rate ofanesthetic effect in ultrasound group, nerve stimulation group, the traditional method group were 100.00%, 90.00%, 76.67%, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）.There were no significant difference in three groups of complications （P〉0.05）.Conclusion Under the guidance safety and effective than nerve of ultrasound for brachial plexus stimulator and traditional method nerve block, work time is short, more of btock.
出处
《现代诊断与治疗》
CAS
2013年第3期492-494,共3页
Modern Diagnosis and Treatment
关键词
超声引导
神经刺激
传统方法
臂丛神经阻滞
疗效
Ultrasonic guidance
Nerve stimulation
The traditional method
Brachial plexus nerveblock
Curative effect
作者简介
李在枢（1965-），女，四川苍溪人，本科，主治医师。研究方向：麻醉。
