临床护理路径对60例剖宫产护理效果的影响

目的：探讨临床护理路径对剖宫产产妇护理效果的影响。方法将120例剖宫产产妇随机分为对照组和观察组各60例，对照组采取剖宫产常规护理方式，观察组采用临床护理路径进行护理，对比两组护理效果。结果对照组满意率为81.6％，观察组满意率为95％，两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。护理效果相比，母乳喂养知识知晓情况：观察组60（100％），对照组53（88.3％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；母婴健康知识知晓情况：观察组57（95％），对照组49（81.7％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；新生儿护理知识知晓情况：观察组58（96.7％），对照组48（80％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；脐部护理合格情况：观察组54（90％），对照组44（73.3％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；新生儿抚触合格情况：观察组59（98.3％），对照组51（85％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；产妇情绪调节良好情况：观察组53（88.3％），对照组41（68.3％），两组相比差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论临床护理路径应用到剖宫产护理中可以避免护理工作中的随意性及盲目性，使护理工作流程化、标准化及规范化，有利于提高剖宫产护理质量。

Effect of Clinical Nursing Path on the Nursing for 60 Cases with Cesarean Section

Objective To explore the effect of clinical nursing path on the nursing for puerperants with cesarean section. Methods 120 puerperants with cesarean section were randomly divided into the control group and the observation group with 60 cases in each. The control group took routine cesarean care, the observation group used clinical nursing path for care. And the nursing effect was compared between the two groups. Results The satisfaction rate of the control group was 81.6%, and that of the observation group was 95%, the difference between the two groups was significant （P〈0.05）. Comparing the nursing effect, in the observation group, 60 cases （100%） knew the knowledge about breast feeding, in the control group, 53 cases （88.3%） knew the knowledge about breast feeding, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. In the observation group, 57 cases（95%） knew the knowledge about maternal and child health, while in the control group, 49 cases（81.7%） knew that, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. In the observation group, 58 cases （96.7%） knew the knowledge about neonatal nursing, in the control group, 48 cases （80%） knew the knowledge about neonatal nursing, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. In the observation group, 54 cases （90%） had qualified umbilical nursing, in the control group, 44 cases（73.3%） had qualified umbilical nursing, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. In the observation group, 59 cases （98.3%） had qualified newborn touching, in the control group, 51 cases （85%） had qualified newborn touching, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. In the observation group, 53 cases （88.3%） had good regulation of mood, in the control group, 41 cases （68.3%） had good regulation of mood, the difference between the two groups was statisticall