摘要
目的对比传统换药技术和负压封闭引流技术治疗皮肤软组织损伤的疗效及其安全性。方法将吉安县万福中心卫生院2013年7月—2015年1月收治的皮肤软组织损伤患者98例作为研究对象,随机分为观察组和对照组,观察组采用负压封闭引流技术治疗,对照组采用传统换药技术进行治疗,比较两组疗效。结果观察组并发症仅1例,对照组出现肌肉萎缩4例,关节强直2例,3例创口感染,共9例并发症;观察组植皮时间较早,创面愈合情况与植皮愈合情况优于对照组,平均总住院时间少于对照组。两组数据对比差异显著(P<0.05),有统计学意义。结论负压封闭引流技术治疗皮肤软组织损伤疗效优于传统换药技术,安全性较高,有临床推广价值。
Objective To compare the traditiona1 treatment techno1ogy and the c1osed negative pressure drainage techno1ogy efficacy and safety of skin soft tissue injuries. Methods From Ju1y 2013 to January 2015 were treated 98 cases of patients with injury of skin soft tissue as the research object,were random1y divided into observation group and the contro1 group and observation group,treated with c1osed negative pressure drainage techniques in the contro1 group treated with traditiona1 treatment techno1ogy,compared two groups of curative effect. Results Two groups of data compared to significant difference（P〈0. 05）, with statistica1 significance. Conclusion the c1osed negative pressure drainage techno1ogy skin soft tissue injuries curative effect is superior to the traditiona1 treatment techno1ogy.
出处
《广东微量元素科学》
CAS
2015年第3期58-60,共3页
Trace Elements Science
关键词
传统换药技术
负压封闭引流技术
皮肤软组织损伤
安全性
对比
traditiona1 treatment techno1ogy
c1osed negative pressure drainage techno1ogy
skin soft tissue injuries
security
contrast
