动态与静态空气床垫预防神经内科卧床患者压疮效果的比较

目的比较静态空气床垫与动态空气床垫对预防神经内科卧床患者压疮发生的效果。方法便利选取2012年5-8月南京军区南京总医院的神经内科患者90例,根据随机数字表法分为静态空气床垫组和动态空气床垫组各45例,两组均每2h翻身1次,预期观察14d,比较两组患者的压疮发生率、压疮严重度、Braden压疮危险评估结果及成本效益。结果两组患者观察期内压疮发生率均为0;Braden压疮危险评估结果分别为(14.45±2.07)分和(14.25±2.49)分,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);静态空气床垫价格比动态空气床垫价格低350元,且无医疗耗电;静态空气床垫和动态空气床垫的平均护理时间分别为(8.87±3.03)、(9.00±3.10)d,平均每人翻身次数分别为(108±37.16)、(106±36.33)次,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论静态空气床垫与动态空气床垫比较,其预防压疮的效果相当,但成本投入少于动态空气床垫。

Comparison of Effectiveness of Static Air Mattress and Dynamic Air Mattress Support in Preventing Pressure Ulcers in Patients of Department of Neurology

Objective To explore the effect of static air mattress and dynamic air mattress support in pre-venting pressure ulcers in patients of neurology department.Methods By convenience sampling,90 patients of neurology department were selected and equally divided into static air mattress group and dynamic air mattress group,Two groups of patients were all had every 2 h repositing and the expected observation period of 14 days.The incidence of pressure ulcer and the severity of pressure ulcer,Braden risk assessment result and the cost-benefit were compared.Results The incidence of pressure ulcers were 0 in both groups.The Braden scoring results were the （14.45±2.07）and （14.25±2.49）respectively（P〉0.05）.The result of cost-benefit analysis showed that price of static air mattress was less 350RMB than dynamic air mattress support without medical power assumption.The average nursing time of two groups patients was （8.87±3.03）days and （9±3.10） days respectively,and the average roll over times were （108±37.16）and （106±36.33）times with no significant difference（P〉0.05）.Conclusion Static air mattress and dynamic air mattress support both have the effect of preventing pressure ulcers,while the expense are less in dynamic air mattress.