不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果分析
|
摘要
目的探讨不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果,以供临床参考。方法选取本院2017年5月~2018年8月收治的72例胸腔积液患者。根据不同的治疗方法,将其分为对照组和观察组。对照组:在第6和第7肋间实施胸腔闭式引流术。观察组:在第5肋间实施胸腔闭式引流术。观察比较两组患者的治疗效果、住院时间、胸水吸收时间、胸腔引流管留置时间、疼痛评分。结果对照组的治疗总有效率(72.22%)低于观察组(91.67%),两组实施比较差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。观察组患者的住院时间、胸水吸收时间以及胸腔引流管置留所用时间与对照组开展比较,差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。观察组患者的术后8、16以及32h疼痛评分低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论在第5肋间实施胸腔闭式引流术对胸腔积液患者开展治疗,效果理想,可降低机体疼痛,减少不良症状的发生,还获得患者与家属的认可,值得在临床中推广。
Objective To explore the curative effect of different intercostal closed thoracic drainage in treatment of pleural effusion to provide clinical reference. Methods 72 patients with pleural effusion who were admitted and treated in our hospital form May 2017 to August 2018 were selected.According to different treatment methods,they were divided into the control group and the observation group.The control group underwent closed thoracic drainage in the 6 th and 7 th intercostal space while and the observation group underwent closed thoracic drainage in the 5 th intercostal space.The curative effects, hospital stay,pleural effusion absorption time,indwelling time of chest drainage tube and pain score were compared between the two groups. Results The total effective rate of the control group was 72.22%,lower than that of the observation group(91.67%).The difference between the two groups was significant(P < 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in hospital stay,pleural effusion absorption time and indwelling time of chest drainage tube between the observation group and the control group(P > 0.05).The pain scores of the observation group were lower than those of the control group at 8 h,16 h and 32 h after operation.The difference was statistically significant(P < 0.05). Conclusion Closed thoracic drainage in the 5 th intercostal space for the treatment of pleural effusion has ideal curative effects.It can reduce the body's pain,reduce the occurrence of adverse symptoms and obtain the recognition of patients and their families,which is worth promoting in the clinical practice.
Objective To explore the curative effect of different intercostal closed thoracic drainage in treatment of pleural effusion to provide clinical reference. Methods 72 patients with pleural effusion who were admitted and treated in our hospital form May 2017 to August 2018 were selected.According to different treatment methods,they were divided into the control group and the observation group.The control group underwent closed thoracic drainage in the 6 th and 7 th intercostal space while and the observation group underwent closed thoracic drainage in the 5 th intercostal space.The curative effects, hospital stay,pleural effusion absorption time,indwelling time of chest drainage tube and pain score were compared between the two groups. Results The total effective rate of the control group was 72.22%,lower than that of the observation group(91.67%).The difference between the two groups was significant(P < 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in hospital stay,pleural effusion absorption time and indwelling time of chest drainage tube between the observation group and the control group(P > 0.05).The pain scores of the observation group were lower than those of the control group at 8 h,16 h and 32 h after operation.The difference was statistically significant(P < 0.05). Conclusion Closed thoracic drainage in the 5 th intercostal space for the treatment of pleural effusion has ideal curative effects.It can reduce the body's pain,reduce the occurrence of adverse symptoms and obtain the recognition of patients and their families,which is worth promoting in the clinical practice.
引文
[1]郭志勇,孙兴国,刘方,等.心肺运动试验评估胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液患者整体功能变化的临床研究[J].中国全科医学,2016,19(17):2053-2060.
[2]董建涛,张亮,王月明.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果观察[J].中国全科医学,2017,20(B12):186-187.
[3]黄种杰,黄小平,洪原城,等.巨大左心房误诊右侧胸腔积液行闭式引流1例报告[J].临床肺科杂志,2015,20(6):1153-1154.
[4]李胜利,王艳芹,李秀叶,等.导管型压阀式胸腔穿刺针胸腔闭式负压引流治疗胸腔积液的效果观察[J].山东医药,2014,58(45):55-57.
[5]聂弘,陈李李,黄文军.中心静脉导管置管引流治疗胸腔积液35例疗效观察[J].中华全科医学,2015,13(8):1268-1269,1272.
[6]何锦程,袁玖,曹承东.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流治疗胸腔积液的疗效分析[J].广东微量元素科学,2017,24(2):30-33.
[7]余江清,冯旋,卢志军.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果比较[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(1):102-104.
[8]尹明秋.中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流术在肺癌胸腔积液中的应用及护理[J].中国肿瘤临床与康复,2014,21(11):1395-1398.
[9]吴建军.危重患者胸腔积液采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗的疗效及安全性分析[J].检验医学与临床,2014,11(16):2291-2292.
[10]黄进代,陈昌枝.渗出性胸腔积液内科胸腔镜检查术后两种引流方法的比较[J].中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版),2017,10(1):75-76.
[11]冷维刚,卢勇,张玉辉,等.危重胸腔积液患者采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗对应激及并发症的影响[J].临床和实验医学杂志,2016,15(8):796-798.
[12]吕治平.胸腔积液采用中心静脉导管置管引流术治疗的效果分析[J].现代养生,2017,9(4):46-47.
[13]邬海.胸腔积液患者采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗的疗效及安全性分析[J].中国医学创新,2014,11(29):20-22.
[14]张爱兰,裴永菊,单海娟.负压式胸腔穿刺导管包用于恶性胸腔积液引流的疗效[J].中国实用医刊,2014,41(22):113-114.
[15]孙珊珊,李开艳,罗鸿昌,等.超声定位引导在胸腔闭式引流术治疗急性创伤性胸腔积液中的临床应用[J].当代医学,2018,24(19):143-144.
[16]徐怀昌.带侧孔中心静脉导管行胸腔积液引流的临床分析[J].实用中西医结合临床,2015,17(3):58-59.
[2]董建涛,张亮,王月明.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果观察[J].中国全科医学,2017,20(B12):186-187.
[3]黄种杰,黄小平,洪原城,等.巨大左心房误诊右侧胸腔积液行闭式引流1例报告[J].临床肺科杂志,2015,20(6):1153-1154.
[4]李胜利,王艳芹,李秀叶,等.导管型压阀式胸腔穿刺针胸腔闭式负压引流治疗胸腔积液的效果观察[J].山东医药,2014,58(45):55-57.
[5]聂弘,陈李李,黄文军.中心静脉导管置管引流治疗胸腔积液35例疗效观察[J].中华全科医学,2015,13(8):1268-1269,1272.
[6]何锦程,袁玖,曹承东.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流治疗胸腔积液的疗效分析[J].广东微量元素科学,2017,24(2):30-33.
[7]余江清,冯旋,卢志军.不同肋间胸腔闭式引流术治疗胸腔积液的效果比较[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(1):102-104.
[8]尹明秋.中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流术在肺癌胸腔积液中的应用及护理[J].中国肿瘤临床与康复,2014,21(11):1395-1398.
[9]吴建军.危重患者胸腔积液采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗的疗效及安全性分析[J].检验医学与临床,2014,11(16):2291-2292.
[10]黄进代,陈昌枝.渗出性胸腔积液内科胸腔镜检查术后两种引流方法的比较[J].中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版),2017,10(1):75-76.
[11]冷维刚,卢勇,张玉辉,等.危重胸腔积液患者采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗对应激及并发症的影响[J].临床和实验医学杂志,2016,15(8):796-798.
[12]吕治平.胸腔积液采用中心静脉导管置管引流术治疗的效果分析[J].现代养生,2017,9(4):46-47.
[13]邬海.胸腔积液患者采用中心静脉导管置管引流治疗的疗效及安全性分析[J].中国医学创新,2014,11(29):20-22.
[14]张爱兰,裴永菊,单海娟.负压式胸腔穿刺导管包用于恶性胸腔积液引流的疗效[J].中国实用医刊,2014,41(22):113-114.
[15]孙珊珊,李开艳,罗鸿昌,等.超声定位引导在胸腔闭式引流术治疗急性创伤性胸腔积液中的临床应用[J].当代医学,2018,24(19):143-144.
[16]徐怀昌.带侧孔中心静脉导管行胸腔积液引流的临床分析[J].实用中西医结合临床,2015,17(3):58-59.