肠外营养三种不同静脉输液途径效果比较

目的比较3种不同静脉输液途径在肠外营养中的效果。方法将90例长期肠外营养的患者随机分为三组,每组各30例,其中A组留置针、B组深静脉置管（CVC）、C组经外周穿刺的中心静脉导管（PICC）进行置管给药,并观察长期置管的临床效果。结果A组置管成功率为93．0％,B组为96．7％,C组为96．7％,三组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;留置时间A组平均（1．5±0．14）d,B组平均（6．5±0．19）d,C组平均（138±4．03）d,三组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;A组静脉炎发生8例,B组3例,C组1例,三组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论PICC导管为长期肠外营养支持的患者提供了一条无痛性治疗途径,对保证患者配合治疗,完成营养支持计划起到积极作用。

Comparison of effect with three different means of intravenous infusion in parenteral nutrition application

Objective To explore the nursing effects with three different means of intravenous infusion in parenteral nutrition (PN) application.Methods All the 90 long-term PN patients were divided into three groups randomly: A team was catheter-placement in peripheral vein (PV); B team was (central venous catheter CVC); C team was (peripherally inserted central catheter PICC). The clinical effect was observed by long-term PN in every 30 cases.Results In PV team the puncture success rate was 93.0%, In CVC team the puncture success rate was 96.7% , in PICC team the puncture success rate was 96.7% (P>0.05); In PV team, the average catheter-placement time was(1.5±0.14)days, in CVC team, the average catheter-placement time was(6.5±0.19)days, in PICC team, the average catheter-placement time was(138±4.03)days (P<0.05); In PV team, the phlebitis was 8 cases, In CVC team, the phlebitis was 3 cases, in PICC team, the phlebitis was 1 cases (P<0.05).Conclusions It was PICC that provided a painless treatment means for long-term parenteral nutritional support patients and played an active role in ensuring the compliance of patients and completing the nutritional support program.