老年股骨颈骨折关节置换术后分期辨证施护效果比较

目的:观察老年股骨颈骨折关节置换术分期辨证施护的临床效果。方法:152例老年股骨颈骨折患者,按患者入住的先后顺序,采用随机数字表法,随机分为观察组78例和对照组74例,对照组采用常规护理,观察组在此基础上,根据损伤后的病理分为瘀阻血耗期、瘀结筋缩期、瘀去正虚期三期辨证施护,比较两组病人住院时间、髋关节功能Harris评分、并发症发生率及患者满意度。结果:观察组住院天数15.87±2.47天,对照组为23.38±1.34天,前者明显少于后者(P0.001);观察组术后7天髋关节Harris评分为(56.43±5.87)分,对照组为(42.38±9.46)分,观察组高于对照组(P0.001);观察组术后30天髋关节Harris评分为(82.84±7.59)分,对照组为(71.32±6.96)分,观察组高于对照组(P0.001);观察组发生术后并发症6例,术后并发症的发生率为7.7%;对照组患者发生术后并发症19例,术后并发症的发生率为25.7%,观察组低于对照组(P0.05);观察组满意度为(95.12±2.48)%,对照组满意度为(88.43±5.45)%(P0.05)。结论:老年股骨颈骨折关节置换术后分期辨证施护,可降低患者焦虑情绪,减少术后并发症,缩短住院时间,较早恢复关节功能,显著提高患者护理满意度。

The Effects of Three Period Dialectical Nursing of Joint Replacement Post Operation on the Elderly Femoral Neck Fracture

Objective ： To observe the effects of three period dialectical nursing of joint replacement Post operation on the elderly femoral neck fractures. Methods： According to the admitted order and with random number table, 152 cases patients with the elderly femoral neck fractures were randomly divided into the observation group （78 cases） and the control group （74 cases） ; and the control group was received the conventional nursing, on basis of the conventional nursing and according to pathology after injury the observation group was received three period dialectical nursing （i. e. stagnation of blood consumption period; stasis of muscle contraction period;deficiency of vital Qi after stasis disappear period）. And then to compare the hospital stay time of patients, the Harris score of hip joint function, the complication rate and the patients＇ satisfaction between two groups. Results ： the hospital stay days of observation group was （ 15.87 ± 2.47 ） days, while the control group （ 23.38 ± 1.34） days , the former was significantly less than the latter （P 〈0. 001 ） ; in seven days of postoperation the Harris hip joint scores of observation group was （56.43 ±5.87） points , while the control group （42.38 ±9.46） points, thus the observation group was higher than the control group （P 〈 0. 001 ） ; in 30 days of postoperationthe this scores of observation group was （ 82.84 ± 7.59 ）, while the control group （ 71.32 ± 6.96 ）, thus the observation group was higher than the control group （ P 〈 0. 001 ） ; there were six cases of postoperative complications in the observation group, the postoperative complication rate was 7.7% ; there were 19 cases of postoperative complications in the control group, the postoperative complication rate was 25.7 %, thereby observation group was more effective than control group（P 〈 0. 05 ） ; the patients＇satisfaction in the observation group was （95.12 ± 2.48 ）%, while in the control group （88.43 ± 5.45 ） % （ P ?