|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]吕文艳,王靖宇,徐文强,等.无线镇痛泵系统在术后镇痛中的临床应用[J].医学研究与战创伤救治(原医学研究生学报),2014,16(03):281-283.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2014.03.018]
　LV Wen-yan,WANG Jing-yu,XU Wen-qiang,et al.Clinical application of wireless analgesic pump system postoperative analgesia[J].JOURNAL OF MEDICALRESEARCH —COMBAT TRAUMA CARE,2014,16(03):281-283.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2014.03.018]
点击复制

无线镇痛泵系统在术后镇痛中的临床应用()
分享到62.8K

《医学研究与战创伤救治》（原医学研究生学报）[ISSN:1672-271X/CN:32-1713/R]

卷:
第16卷
期数:
2014年03期
页码:
281-283
栏目:
出版日期:
2014-05-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Clinical application of wireless analgesic pump system postoperative analgesia
作者:
吕文艳; 王靖宇; 徐文强; 张曙报; 蒋仙红; 金孝梁
310004 浙江杭州，解放军117医院麻醉科
Author(s):
LV Wen-yan; WANG Jing-yu; XU Wen-qiang; ZHANG Shu-bao; JIANG Xian-hong; JIN Xiao-liang.
Department of Anesthesiology,117 Hospital of PLA,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 310004,China
关键词:
镇痛泵; 无线系统; 术后镇痛; 质量
Keywords:
analgesic pump;  the wireless system;  postoperative analgesia;  quality
分类号:
R971.2
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2014.03.018
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 比较无线镇痛泵系统与传统镇痛泵的镇痛效果及不良反应。方法 某院2013年4-11月采用无线镇痛泵系统于术后镇痛595例(W组)，与2012年11月-2013年3月采用传统镇痛泵用于术后镇痛608例(C组)对比，观察术后2 h、6 h、12 h、24 h、48 h患者疼痛强度、处理时间、治疗满意度及不良反应。结果 两组患者的一般情况比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后2 h、24 h、48 h两组间疼痛强度比较差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)，W组患者6 h、12 h疼痛强度低于C组，两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。疼痛的处理时间两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。经静脉患者自控镇痛(PCIA)过程中头晕、恶心呕吐的发生率两组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。W组患者的总体满意度高于C组(P<0.01)。结论 与传统镇痛泵比较，无线镇痛泵系统能缩短疼痛有效处理时间，显著提高PCIA 48 h内患者的总体满意度，在术后镇痛中具有明显的优越性。
Abstract:
Objective To compare the analgesia effects and side effects of using wireless analgesic pump and traditional analgesic pump.Methods Our hospital used wireless analgesic pump to ease pain in 595 cases after operation from April to November in 2013 year and used traditional analgesic pump to ease pain after operation in 608 cases from November in 2012 year to March in 2013 year,clinical observation of postoperative patients pain intensity,processing time,treatment satisfaction and side effects were compared between two groups.Results There was no significant difference comparatively between above mentioned two groups (P>0.05).There was no significant difference comparatively in pain intensity after operation 2 h,24 h,48 h between two groups (P>0.05).W groups pain intensity was lower than C group after operation 6 h and 12 h.The comparative difference had statistical sense (P<0.01).The comparative difference about processing pain time had statistical sense (P<0.01).There was no significant difference comparatively about lightheaded,nausea and vomiting during PICA between two groups (P>0.05).W groups degree of satisfaction was higher than C group.The comparative difference had statistical sense (P<0.01).Conclusion Compared with traditional analgesic pump,wireless analgesic pump system shortened the time from receiving algetic information to effective treatment,and improved the patients general evaluation for 48 hours PCIA treatment.In general,it had obvious superiority in the postoperative analgesia.

参考文献/References:

[1]Diaz G，Flood P.Strategies for effective postoperative pain management[J].Pediatrics，2006，72(3):145-150. 　　
[2]Brown CM，Anderson G.Just one opioid prescription[J].Aust Fam physician，2007，36(7):559-560. 　　
[3]中华医学会麻醉学分会.成人术后疼痛处理专家共识[J].临床麻醉学杂志，2010，26(3):190-196. 　　
[4]周燕艳.术后急性疼痛治疗的新进展[J].临床药物治疗杂志，2012,10(5):34-38. 　　
[5]董丰琴，熊秀萍，陈 丹.骨科患者术后疼痛管理的新进展[J].东南国防医药，2013,15(6):615-617. 　　
[6]JackNT，Liem EB，Vonhogen LH.Use of a stimulating catheter for total knee replacement surgery:preliminary results[J].Br J Anaesth，2005，95(2):250-254. 　　
[7]傅文婷.广东省术后镇痛现状调查[D].广州:广州医学院，2011. 　　
[8]鄢建勤，王 英，唐岸柳，等.湖南三大省级医院术后疼痛现况调查[J].中国现代医学杂志，2011，21(11):1384-1387. 　　
[9]叶伟光，王天龙，许亚超，等.术后管理模式的应用探讨[J].北京医学，2011,33(8):665-667. 　　
[10]王 钊，刘德行，谭丹丹，等.术后镇痛效果及管理质量分析[J].遵义医学报学报，2012,35(1):50-52. 　　
[11]满 祎.基于Zigbee技术的无线镇痛泵系统的设计与应用[J].医疗设备，2012,25(12):16-17.

相似文献/References:

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
-
更新日期/Last Update: 2014-05-20