碳纤维敷料在烧伤创面中的临床应用

目的观察碳纤维敷料对烧伤创面的治疗作用。方法选择浅Ⅱ°、深Ⅱ°和残余创面共277例,随机分为对照组(碘伏纱布换药)和治疗组(碳纤维敷料换药)。观察敷料吸收容量、创面炎症反应,并做创面细菌定量和创面组织学检查,记录创面愈合时间等。结果与对照组相比,治疗组敷料吸收容量大,创面炎症反应轻,创周炎症消退快,痂下组织细菌定量低。浅Ⅱ°、深Ⅱ°及残余创面愈合时间分别为(7．4±2．1)d、(16．2±2．6)d、(19．4±6．2)d,均较对照组缩短,对照组分别为(9．6±2．4)d、(19．6±3．4)d和(28．8±10．4)d。结论碳纤维敷料是一种具有吸附能力强、可有效控制炎症反应、促进创面愈合等特点的新型敷料。     

透明型明胶/壳聚糖烧伤创面敷料的研制

研制烧(创)伤后创面的覆盖敷料，需找到一种载药性好、可生物降解、副作用小、应用面广的载体材料。明胶／壳聚糖凝胶则符合以上要求，且可根据不同目的制成凝胶或凝胶样膜使用。笔者通过对明胶／壳聚糖柔韧性和吸胀性的研究，探讨其作为创面敷料的可行性。     

经皮给药治疗轮状病毒感染性腹泻的疗效观察

轮状病毒感染是感染性腹泻最常见的病因 ,其治疗方法常采用口服或静脉给药。 1999年 10月至2 0 0 1年 10月 ,我院儿科在口服及静脉给药的同时辅以经皮给药治疗轮状病毒感染性腹泻患儿 2 0 3例 ,收到了满意的效果 ,报道如下。1　资料与方法1 1一般资料本组 2 0 3例 ,男 113例、女 90例 ,月龄 0～ 6个月 5 2例 ,～ 12个月 84例、～ 2 4个月 5 3例、～ 36个月 14例。大便每天 5～ 12 (9 5± 2 6 )次 ,均经大便轮状病毒抗原检测确诊。随机分为观察组和对照组 ,观察组 10 5例 ,对照组 98例。两组年龄、性别、病情、病程比较 ,异差无显著性意义 (…     

负压封闭引流技术联合银离子敷料治疗骨科感染性创面的临床研究

目的 探讨负压封闭引流技术(vacuum sealing drainage, VSD)联合银离子敷料治疗骨科感染性创面的临床效果。方法 2019年10月～2021年6月期间符合筛选标准的病人30例,随机分为实验组和对照组各15例,对照组采用常规VSD治疗,实验组采用VSD联合银离子敷料治疗。1周后,比较两组创面细菌清除率、肉芽组织覆盖率,记录两组创面愈合时间及治疗总有效率。结果 治疗1周后,实验组细菌清除率为(97.90±1.34)%,对照组为(89.58±1.26)%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组肉芽组织覆盖率为(89.59±2.05)%,对照组为(76.02±1.69)%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组创面愈合时间为(17.67±1.18)天,对照组为(22.33±2.09)天,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组治疗有效率为93.33%,对照组为73.33%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 对于骨科感染性创面,采用VSD联合银离子敷料治疗效果满意,能有效减少创面感染、促进创面愈合。     

含钙镁生物敷料在氢氟酸烧伤创面的应用

氢氟酸烧伤可造成严重的皮肤损害，重症患者可危及生命。1996至2004年，我们在动物实验的基础上对46例氢氟酸烧伤局部治疗进行对比研究。     

浸浴结合银离子敷料治疗大面积烧伤患者残余创面的疗效

目的 观察浸浴结合银离子敷料治疗大面积烧伤患者残余创面的疗效. 方法 2008年1月-2012年2月笔者单位收治90例大面积烧伤后期残余创面患者,按照随机数字表法分为对照组45例和试验组45例,对照组患者浸浴后创面外用磺胺嘧啶银纱布处理,试验组患者浸浴后以银离子敷料覆盖创面.用药后21 d,评定2组患者的治愈率.观察治疗过程中患者的不良反应.用药前及用药后7、14、21 d,分离与鉴定细菌,并计算创面细菌清除率.对数据进行x2检验和t检验.结果 用药后21 d,对照组与试验组患者的创面治愈率分别为62.22％(28/45)、86.67％(39/45),组间比较差异有统计学意义(x 2=7.067,P＜0.05).用药后2组患者均未见明显不良反应.用药前及用药后7、14 d,2组患者均检出金黄色葡萄球菌、表皮葡萄球菌、铜绿假单胞菌、大肠埃希菌等.试验组患者用药后7、14 d细菌清除率分别为50.0％、71.4％,明显高于对照组(x2值分别为8.067、5.896,P＜0.05或P＜0.01).用药后21 d,2组患者细菌清除率均为100.0％. 结论 浸浴疗法结合银离子敷料治疗烧伤后残余创面能有效控制创面感染,显著提高治愈率.     

纳米银敷料治疗烧伤创面的临床观察

目的 观察纳米银外用敷料对烧伤创面的治疗作用。方法 选择浅Ⅱ度及深Ⅱ度创面共116例，分别随机分为对照组54例(用皮维碘纱布换药)和治疗组62例(用皮维碘纳米银敷料换药)，观察创而渗出、炎症反应、浅Ⅱ度7d创面愈合率和深Ⅱ度创向14d创面愈合率、创面愈合时间，随访观察瘢痕增生情况，结果 与对照组比较，纳米银组创面下燥结痂快，炎症反应轻，创周炎症消退快。纳米银组：浅Ⅱ度7d愈合率68．4％，平均愈合时间8．3d；深Ⅱ度14d愈合率87．5％，平均愈合时间16．4d.对照组：浅Ⅱ度7d愈合率31．3％，平均愈合时间11．2d；深Ⅱ度14d愈合率59．1％，平均愈合时间19.8d。两组7d、14td愈合率和平均愈合时间比较差异均有显著性，随访10例瘢痕增生程度较轻。结论 纳米银是一种有效控制炎症反应，促进创面愈合的良好外用敷料，其能否减轻瘢痕增生尚需进一步观察。     

生物敷料A包扎电烧伤创面21例

1996年 5月～ 2 0 0 0年 8月笔者单位共收治电烧伤患者38例 ,烧伤面积为 8%～ 10 %TBSA ,深Ⅱ度。其中 2 1例患者清创后用生物敷料A(威海华特保健品有限公司 ,批号 :96 0 30 1、980 90 6 )包扎创面 (A组 ) ,17例用洗必泰纱布包扎(B组 )。两组患者全身情况及局部伤情差异无显著性意义(P >0 .0 5 )。创面用 1∶10 0 0新洁尔灭、等渗盐水清创后 ,A组用生物敷料A覆盖 ;B组用 1∶2 0 0 0洗必泰纱布覆盖 ,均再用无菌敷料包扎。换药 1次 / 2d ,清创至局部无坏死组织后 ,对创面行植皮或皮瓣修复。经过上述处理 ,A组感染 1例 (4 7% ) ,B组感染…     

应用伤安素敷料与常规换药方法护理烧伤创面的对比

目的:观察含纳米生物相容剂的高分子活性伤安素敷料在烧伤换药中的应用效果。方法:选择门诊烧伤换药病人40例,根据烧伤深度,烧伤面积,随机分成伤安素换药组20例,其中13例为新鲜烫伤的浅Ⅱ度～深Ⅱ度,7例皆为偏深的深Ⅱ度残余创面之中3例伴有糖尿病。生理盐水清洁创面,引流水疱液,保留疱皮。0.25%碘伏溶液消毒,伤安素直接贴于创面,无菌敷料覆盖,绷带包扎;对照组20例,其中17例浅Ⅱ度～深Ⅱ度创面,3例为偏深的深Ⅱ度残余创面。处理方法除用0.25%碘伏纱布包扎外,其它同伤安素组。结果:伤安素换药组,浅Ⅱ度～深Ⅱ度创面,首次伤安素敷料包扎后,间隔2～5d 后换药。外层敷料清洁、干燥,创面无明显红、肿,疼痛明显减轻。偏深的深Ⅱ度尤其伴有糖尿病的创面去坏死痂皮效果明显,促上皮生长效果佳。创面愈合时间提前1～2d。且愈合后的创面色素较对照组浅、淡。结论:伤安素敷料具有较强的吸附性,质地柔软,无致敏,无刺激性。消炎效果好,减少换药次数,减轻痛苦,促进创面愈合,是经济方便的外用烧伤敷料。     

负压封闭引流术联合银离子敷料治疗难愈性烧伤创面的临床效果

的 探究负压封闭引流术联合银离子敷料在难愈性烧伤创面治疗中的应用效果。方法 选择2021年8月-2023年2月京山市人民医院收治的80例难愈性烧伤患者为研究对象,以随机数字表法分为对照组和试验组,每组40例。对照组接受负压封闭引流术（VSD）治疗,试验组接受负压封闭引流术联合银离子敷料治疗,比较两组创面恢复情况、临床指标、疼痛程度、创面分泌物细菌检出率及并发症发生率。结果 试验组创面红期时间、创面愈合时间及敷料维持时间均优于对照组（P＜0.05）;试验组换药次数、住院时间及治疗总费用均优于对照组（P＜0.05）;试验组治疗后VAS评分低于对照组（P＜0.05）;两组治疗后创面分泌物细菌检出率均低于治疗前,且试验组低于对照组（P＜0.05）;试验组并发症发生率为2.50%,低于对照组的15.00%（P＜0.05）。结论 采用负压封闭引流术联合银离子敷料治疗难愈性烧伤创面的效果良好,可有效促进创面愈合,提高敷料使用率,减轻疼痛,同时可降低创面分泌物细菌检出率和并发症发生几率,有利于促进患者快速康复出院,减少治疗费用,减轻患者的经济负担。     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

目的 了解不同敷料组合对烧伤创面微环境及愈合的影响.方法 选择烧伤后需行手术植皮的患者186例,供皮区创面取皮厚度均为0.3 mm.将200个供皮区创面按表格随机法进行分组,分为藻酸盐棉垫组(藻酸盐敷料+棉垫)、凡士林棉垫组(凡士林油纱+棉垫)、藻酸盐泡沫组(藻酸盐敷料+泡沫敷料)、凡士林泡沫组(凡七林油纱+泡沫敷料).观察各种敷料对患者创面水分蒸发量及pH值的影响,比较各组创面的细菌定植情况、揭除敷料时患者疼痛程度及创面愈合时间.结果 共有184例患者的198个创面完成试验全过程,4种组合敷料可造成不同的创面微环境.藻酸盐棉垫组、凡士林棉垫组、藻酸盐泡沫组、凡士林泡沫组患者创面的敷料表面水分蒸发量分别为(35.5±3.2)、(31.3±2.8)、(23.1±2.9)、(18.1±2.3)mL·h-1·m-2,保湿性能以凡士林泡沫组为佳;创面pH值分别为7.22±0.06、7.41±0.03、7.05±0.03、7.34±0.06.创面细菌培养阳性率以藻酸盐泡沫组(4.0%)最低,凡士林泡沫组(22.4%)最高.揭除患者创面敷料时疼痛程度以藻酸盐泡沫组最轻(0.98±0.12),凡士林棉垫组最重(8.14±0.82).创面愈合时间藻酸盐泡沫组最短,为(6.7±0.8)d;凡士林泡沫组最长,为(15.6±3.5)d.结论 不同敷料在同样创面上使用,会营造不同的创面微环境;该环境与创面愈合时间密切相关,湿度对创面愈合的影响比pH值更为重要.     

35例烧伤患者难愈创面的治疗

笔者单位自1992年1月～2000年11月,收治烧伤后难愈创面35例,经全身及局部治疗,取得良好的效果,现报告如下:     

生物敷料A贴敷烧伤二度创面与暴露、包扎疗法的比较

将生物敷料A贴敷烧伤浅、深二度新鲜创面与暴露、包扎疗法进行创面感染情况和创面愈合时间两方面比较。结果显示，生物敷料A组创面感染率明显低于中药暴露组（P＜0．05）和药物包扎组（P＜0．05）。生物敷料A组用于浅二度烧伤创面愈合时间明显比中药暴露组缩短（P＜0．05）。与药物包扎组无显著性差异（P＜0．05）。用于深二度创面，敷料A组创面愈合时间明显比中药暴露组和药物包扎组缩短（P＜0．05）。认为生物敷料A贴敷烧烫伤深、浅二度创面感染率低，创面愈合较快。     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.     

不同敷料组合对烧伤患者供皮区创面微环境的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of dressing materials in various combinations on bum wound microenvironment and healing condition. Methods Two hundred donor sites with wounds of 0.3 mm in depth in 186 burn patients, who needed skingrafting and admitted to our ward were enrolled in study, and they were divided into A ( with dressing composed of aiginate + cotton pad for donor area), B ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + cotton pad for donor area) , C (with dressing composed of algi-nate+ foam dressing for donor area), D ( with dressing composed of vaseline gauze + foam dressing for donor area) groups according to random table method. Effect of dressings on wound evaporation and pH value were observed. Bacterial colonization, degree of pain complained by patients after dressing change, and wound healing time in each group were compared. Results One hundred and eighty-four patients complied with the study, while 2 patients were excluded due to untimely falling-off of the dressing. Wound evaporaton in respectively, among them B group showed optimal effect of keeping humidity (P<0.01). Wound pH value in A, B, C, D groups was 7.22±0.06, 7.41±0.03, 7.05±0.03, 7.34±0.06, respectively, among them it was highest in B group. The positive rate of bacteria in D group was highest (22.4%), and lowest in C group (4.0%). Pain was lightest in C group (score was 0.98±0.12), and most serious in B group ( score was 8.14±0.82). The shortest wound healing time was seen in C group (6.7±0.8 d) , and longest in D group (15.6±3.5 d). Conclusions Application of various dressings on similar wounds can pro-duce different wound microenvironment, which is closely related to wound healing time. Compared with pH value, humidity is the more important factor for wound healing.