两种不同持物钳筒在手术室临床应用及效果评价.docVIP

两种不同持物钳筒在手术室的临床应用及效果评价 　　[摘要] 目的 探讨和分析不同持物钳筒在医院手术室的临床应用效果。 方法 方便选择该院2015年4月―2016年7月择期手术94例（手术时长均大于6 h），按手术时间先后顺序随机分为观察组A和对照组A，每组47例；选择无手术状态下监测64例，采用随机原则分为观察组B和对照组B，每组32例。对照组A、B均使用中号持物钳筒，观察组A、B均使用该院自行研制的医用无菌持物钳筒，观察比较两种持物钳筒在两种状态下各个时间段的细菌监测效果。 结果 在手术状态下，观察组A选择的柱形持物钳筒在第4、8、10、12、14小时细菌检测合格率分别为100.0%、100.0%、100.0%、100.0%、100.0%、97.8%，能够持续无菌状态的有效时长是12 h以上，显著高于对照组A（6 h），差异有统计学意义；在非手术状态下，观察组B选择的柱形持物钳筒在第4、6、8、10、12、14小时细菌监测合格率全部为100.0%，能够持续无菌状态的有效时长是14 h以上，显著高于对照组B（8 h），差异有统计学意义。结论 自行设计的医用新型无菌持物钳筒在两种情况下能够持续无菌状态的时长都要超过中号持物钳筒，且能降低更换频次与损耗，减轻护理的任务量，非常值得在临床中大力普及和推广。 　　[关键词] 持物钳筒；手术室；无菌持物钳 　　[中图分类号] R4 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2018）02（b）-0164-03 　　[Abstract] Objective This paper tries to investigate and analyze the clinical effect of different holding forceps tubes in the operation room. Methods From April 2015 to July 2016， 94 cases of elective surgery （duration of surgery were longer than 6h）， according to the order of operation time， were conveniently divided into observation group A and control group A， 47 cases in each group； no surgery under the monitoring of 64 cases， were randomly divided into observation group B and control group B， 32 cases in each group. The control group A， B were used medium holding cylinder， the observation group A， B were used in the hospital developed a sterile aseptic cartridge， to observe and compare the bacterial monitoring effect of two kinds of holder pincers in each time period in two states. Results Under the operation condition， the qualified rate of bacteria detection in the column collet of observation group A was 100.00%， 100.00%， 100.00%， 100.00%， 100.00%， 97.8% at the 4，8，10，12 and 14 hours， The effective duration of continuous aseptic condition was more than 12 h， significantly higher than the control group A（6h）. There was a statistically significant； In the non-surgical state， the qualified rate of bacteria monitoring in column 4， 6， 8， 10， 12， and 14 hours after the observation of group B was all 100.00%， and the effective d