优质护理对腹部术后急性肠梗阻患者的护理效果分析

来源 :中国医药指南 | 被引量 : 0次 | 上传用户:tlf123
下载到本地 , 更方便阅读
声明 : 本文档内容版权归属内容提供方 , 如果您对本文有版权争议 , 可与客服联系进行内容授权或下架
论文部分内容阅读
目的 分析优质护理应用于腹部术后急性肠梗阻的临床效果?方法 对我院在2017年9月至2018年9个月开展腹部手术以后出现急性肠梗阻的76例患者以随机方法 分为观察组和对照组,每组38例?并分别对两组患者按照优质护理和常规护理的方法 实施护理,并比较不同护理后的效果?结果 ①经过不同护理之后,观察组的护理满意度为94.74%(36/38),P<0.05;分析观察两组患者首次排气时间?胃肠功能恢复时间?首次排便时间以及住院时间,观察组患者的各项时间指标,明显比对照组的78.95%(30/38)更高(P<0.0“,”Objective To analyze the clinical effect of high-quality nursing on acute intestinal obstruction after abdominal operation. Methods A total of 76 patients with acute intestinal obstruction after abdominal surgery performed in our hospital from September 2017 to 9 months in 2018 were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with the same number of 38 cases. The two groups of patients were treated according to the methods of high-quality nursing and routine nursing, and the effects of different nursing were compared. Results (1) After different care, the observation group\'s nursing satisfaction rate was 94.74%, which was significantly higher than the control group\'s 78.95% (P <0.05). (2) The observation group\'s first care after nursing The exhaust time, gastrointestinal function recovery time, first defecation time, hospitalization time, etc. were significantly shorter than those in the control group (P <0.05). (3) The overall incidence of complications after nursing in the observation group was significantly lower the control group (P <0.05). Conclusion To provide high-quality nursing methods for patients with acute intestinal obstruction after abdominal operation can improve patients\' nursing satisfaction, accelerate patients\' recovery speed, help to recover gastrointestinal function as soon as possible, reduce complications, shorten hospital stay, and have significant clinical effect.
其他文献
目的 探究康复护理在治疗股骨粗隆骨折患者的应用效果,以便为该病的护理提供理论指导?方法 将2018年5月至2019年5月到我院进行治疗的74例股骨粗中间骨折患者,按照随机方法 分为观察组与对照组,平均每组37例?两组患者分别采用康复护理和常规护理实施针对性干预,并将护理的效果进行对比?结果 ①观察组患者护理以后,骨折愈合时间和住院时间都普遍短于对照组,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)?②观察组(1例,占2.70%)护理后并发症发生率明显比对照组(11例,占29.73%)更低,两组差异有统计学意义(P<