静脉留置针封管方法与留置时间关系的探讨

目的探讨静脉留置针封管方法与留置时间的关系。方法采用静脉留置针常用的输液器直接快速输入封管法、0．9％氯化钠注射液封管法和肝素液封管法，观察静脉留置针的留置时间及静脉炎的发生率。结果快速输入封管组和0．9％氯化钠注射液封管组比肝素液封管组的留置时间分别延长25．7％和19．3％，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01或P〈0．05）；但快速输入封管组与0．9％氯化钠注射液封管组间的留置时间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。快速输入封管组、0．9％氯化钠注射液封管组静脉炎的发生率均低于肝素液封管组，三者问静脉炎的发生率差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；但快速输入封管组、0．9％氯化钠注射液封管组静脉炎的发生率差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论快速输入封管和0．9％氯化钠注射液封管可显著延长静脉留置针的留置时间，并可降低静脉炎的发生率。

Relation between sealed tube method and retention time of intravenous catheter system

Objective To explore the relation between sealed tube method and retention time of intravenous catheter system . Methods Adopt direct injection seal-tube method, saline injection seal-tube method and heparin liquid seal-tube method with common intravenous catheter were adopted the intravenous catheter's retention time and incidence of phlebitis were observed. Results The retention time in direct injection seal-tube group and saline injec-tion seal-tube group respectively prolonged of 25.7% and 19. 3% compared with heparin liquid seal-tube group.There was significant difference (P < 0. 01 or P < 0. 05) through statistical analysis. But there was no significant differ-ence(P 0. 05) between direct injection seal-tube group and saline injection seal-tube group in retention time. Theincidence of phlebitis in both direct injection seal-tubo group and saline injection seal-tube group were below to the heparin liquid seal-tube group. There was significant difference(P 0. 05) in the three groups. But there was no sig-nificant difference(P 0. 05) between direct injection seal-tube group and saline injection seal-tube group in the inci-dence of phlebitis. Conclusion Direct injection seal-tube method and saline injection seal-tube method can signifi-cantly extend intravenous catheter's retention time and reduce the incidence of phlebitis.