李霞
常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)與腹腔鏡切除術(shù)的不同護(hù)理方法比較
李霞
目的對(duì)比闌尾切除術(shù)中使用常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)與腹腔鏡手術(shù)的護(hù)理方法差異對(duì)比。方法回顧性分析我院2013年6月—2015年12月收治的闌尾炎切除患者108例作為研究對(duì)象,根據(jù)患者自愿的形式分為常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)組及腹腔鏡手術(shù)組,各54例,對(duì)比兩組患者術(shù)后的治療效果及護(hù)理方法的差異。結(jié)果常規(guī)組與腹腔鏡組兩組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P>0.05;兩組患者的平均住院時(shí)間及肛門平均排氣時(shí)間比較,常規(guī)組長(zhǎng)于腹腔鏡組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P<0.05;兩組患者的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率及止痛藥使用率對(duì)比,常規(guī)組高于腹腔鏡組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P<0.05。結(jié)論闌尾炎切除術(shù)中采用腹腔鏡手術(shù)在實(shí)際操作過程中比常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)中創(chuàng)口小、出血少,肛門排氣的平均時(shí)間及住院平均時(shí)間都要少,且在術(shù)后護(hù)理中比開腹手術(shù)有更低的感染率。
開腹手術(shù);腹腔鏡手術(shù);闌尾炎;護(hù)理效果
闌尾炎的治療以手術(shù)切除為主要手段,傳統(tǒng)的手術(shù)方法是開腹手術(shù),而隨著腹腔鏡及時(shí)的不斷嫻熟及廣泛應(yīng)用后也被用于闌尾炎的切除手術(shù)中[1-3]。本文就闌尾炎切除術(shù)中,傳統(tǒng)手術(shù)與腹腔鏡手術(shù)的差異及護(hù)理異同并效果進(jìn)行分析,情況報(bào)道如下。
1.1 一般資料
回顧性分析我院2013年6月—2015年12月手指的闌尾炎切除患者108例作為研究對(duì)象,根據(jù)患者自愿的形式分為常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)組及腹腔鏡手術(shù)組各54例,常規(guī)組中男性患者為32例,女性患者為22例;年齡為16~67歲,平均年齡(46.8±4.2)歲;腹腔鏡組中男性患者為34例,女性患者為20例;年齡為15~66歲,平均年齡為(46.5±4.0)歲;比較兩組患者的一般材料,差異不具統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P>0.05,有可比性。
1.2 方法
常規(guī)組患者行開腹闌尾切除術(shù),腹腔鏡組行腹腔鏡下微創(chuàng)術(shù),具體如下:
闌尾炎患者及家屬一般都處于急躁的心情狀態(tài),護(hù)理人員要通過有效的溝通安撫其焦躁的心情,在手術(shù)方案的選擇上將兩者的利弊都告訴患者,讓患者自己選擇手術(shù)方法,切不可自作主張為患者建議手術(shù)方法,以減少術(shù)后糾紛的發(fā)生[4]。并根據(jù)患者選個(gè)手術(shù)的方法來進(jìn)行術(shù)前相應(yīng)的囑咐,兩類手術(shù)術(shù)前均要禁食,做相應(yīng)的常規(guī)檢查。因?yàn)閮山M患者在術(shù)中采用的麻醉方式有差異,固在術(shù)后的護(hù)理也是不盡相同的,常規(guī)組采用的硬膜外麻醉方法,一般等患者回到病房后已經(jīng)清醒,給予常規(guī)的護(hù)理即可,但是腹腔鏡組一般回到病房后一般都沒有清醒,需要繼續(xù)觀察患者的生命體征,平躺去枕,防治嘔吐誤吸,告知家屬如有異常及時(shí)通知護(hù)理人員[5]。腹腔鏡組因?qū)δc道的損傷性小固術(shù)后4 h左右就可以進(jìn)食流食,通過食物刺激腸道蠕動(dòng),利于肛門排氣。開腹組因手術(shù)對(duì)腸道損傷較大,需要24~48 h后方可進(jìn)食流食,且開腹組肛門排氣需要時(shí)間更長(zhǎng)。術(shù)后密切關(guān)注引流液體的出量及顏色,一般24~48 h后可以將引流管拔除[6]。一般腹腔鏡組傷口感染幾率小,3~5 d可以出院,常規(guī)組一般7~10 d可以出院。
1.3 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法
采用SPSS20.0對(duì)兩組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間、平均住院時(shí)間、肛門平均排氣時(shí)間及并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì),計(jì)量資料采用t檢驗(yàn),計(jì)數(shù)資料采用χ2檢驗(yàn),P<0.05,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
分析兩組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間可見常規(guī)組與腹腔鏡組分別為(41.1±2.5)min,(43.2±2.8)min,差異沒有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05);比較兩組患者的平均住院時(shí)間、肛門平均排氣時(shí)間及并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率,可見常規(guī)組為(8.3±1.8)d,(27.1±4.5)h,24.1%(13/54);腹腔鏡組為(3.1±0.5)d,(6.3±1.2)h,5.6%(3/54),兩組數(shù)據(jù)對(duì)比差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P<0.05。
急性闌尾炎是臨床較為常見的急腹癥之一,發(fā)病較急,發(fā)展較快,以患者的腹部疼痛為主要臨床癥狀[7]。有學(xué)者研究稱腹腔鏡手術(shù)在闌尾炎切除術(shù)中出血少、創(chuàng)口小及恢復(fù)快,是臨床首選方法[8-9]。本文通過研究可見腹腔鏡組除了在手術(shù)時(shí)間上不具有優(yōu)勢(shì),在平均住院時(shí)間、肛門平均排氣時(shí)間及并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率等各統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)均優(yōu)于常規(guī)組,且護(hù)理方法要比常規(guī)組更為簡(jiǎn)單。綜上所述,闌尾炎切除術(shù)中采用腹腔鏡手術(shù)在實(shí)際操作過程中比常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)中創(chuàng)口小、出血少,肛門排氣的平均時(shí)間及住院平均時(shí)間少,且在術(shù)后護(hù)理中比開腹手術(shù)有更低的感染率。
[1] 符梅華,林雪梅,曾碧嬌,等.急性闌尾炎腹腔鏡闌尾切除與開腹闌尾切除臨床護(hù)理比較[J].黑龍江科技信息,2011,14(33):43-44.
[2] 龔莉.闌尾常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)與腹腔鏡切除術(shù)的護(hù)理分析比較[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)藥導(dǎo)報(bào),2011,8(20):173-174.
[3] 李發(fā)雨.不同護(hù)理模式在闌尾手術(shù)患者中的綜合護(hù)理效果觀察[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)藥導(dǎo)報(bào),2011,8(22):111-112.
[4] 冼秀文,王敬芳,何育玲.116例急性闌尾炎兩種不同手術(shù)治療的護(hù)理探討[J].醫(yī)學(xué)信息,2012,25(6):895-897.
[5] 王曉宇.闌尾炎常規(guī)開腹手術(shù)與腹腔鏡手術(shù)的護(hù)理分析[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)藥指南,2014,12(18):341-342.
[6] 宋昌燕,張吉銀.腹腔鏡與開腹手術(shù)治療闌尾炎的效果對(duì)比觀察及護(hù)理[J].臨床合理用藥雜志,2013,6(34):110-111.
[7] 張曉明,陶在平.98例急性闌尾炎兩種不同手術(shù)治療的護(hù)理探討[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)藥指南,2014,12(15):355-356.
[8] 王智全.開腹手術(shù)與腹腔鏡手術(shù)用于治療急性化膿性闌尾炎臨床比較[J].吉林醫(yī)學(xué),2013,34(11):2046-2047.
[9] 王春燕. 護(hù)理干預(yù)對(duì)急性闌尾炎患者臨床治療效果的影響[J]. 中國(guó)繼續(xù)醫(yī)學(xué)教育,2016,8(5):240-241.
Comparison of DifferentMethodsof Nursing Care Between Appendectomy and Laparoscopic Surgery
LI Xia Operation Room, Inner Mongolia Baogang Hospital, Baotou Inner Mongolia 014010, China
ObjectiveComparison of the differences of nursing methods between conventional and laparoscopic surgery in appendectomy.MethodsA retrospective analysis of our hospital from June 2013 to December 2015 were appendicitis in 108 patients as the research object, according to the patient's voluntary form is divided into conventional laparotomy group and laparoscopic surgery group, 54 cases in each group, the treatment e ff ect and nursing methods were compared between two groups after the difference.ResultsComparing the operation time of conventional group and the laparoscopic group of patients in the two groups, the di ff erence was not statistically signi fi cant, P>0.05; compare the average hospitalization time and average anal exhaust time of patients in the two groups, the conventional group than in the laparoscopic group, the di ff erence was statistically signi fi cant, P<0.05; two groups of patients and the incidence rate of complication and analgesic use rate compared to conventional group than in the laparoscopic group, the difference was statistically significant, P<0.05.ConclusionAppendectomy by laparoscopy in the actual operation process than conventional open surgery in small wound, less bleeding, the average time of anal exhaust and the average hospitalization time is less, and the postoperative care than laparotomy with lower infection rate.
open surgery; laparoscopic surgery; appendicitisscore; nursing e ff ect
R473
A
1674-9308(2017)10-0236-02
10.3969/j.issn.1674-9308.2017.10.133
內(nèi)蒙古包鋼醫(yī)院手術(shù)室,內(nèi)蒙古 包頭 014010