经桡动脉与经股动脉途径冠状动脉介入术的护理比较分析

目的:探讨经桡动脉行冠状动脉介入术与经股动脉冠状动脉介入术后的并发症与舒适度,对比经桡动脉、股动脉冠状动脉介入术的优缺点。方法:391例经皮冠脉介入治疗的患者,按分为两组:桡动脉组(183例)和股动脉组(208例),观察两组术后并发症和舒适度的情况。结果:经桡动脉途径冠状动脉介入患者术后局部血肿或伤口出血、血管迷走反射并发症明显低于经股动脉冠状动脉介入术组(P<0.05),动脉痉挛及闭塞发生率桡动脉组高于股动脉组(P<0.01);术后经桡动脉组腰背疼痛、尿潴留、便秘、平均卧床时间及换药次数明显低于经股动脉组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:经桡动脉行冠状动脉介入术可减少患者不适与痛苦,增加舒适度,同时减少护理工作量。

Comparative Analysis of Nursing between the Methods of Radical Coronary Intervention and Femoral Coronary Intervention

Objective：To investigate the complications and comfortable level with the methods of radical coronary intervention and femoral coronary intervention and compare the two methods.Methods：391 patients who employed percutaneous coronary intervention（PCI）were divided into two groups according to intervention puncture way：183 patients through radial artery and 208 patients through femoral artery.The complications and the comfortable level of each group were observed.Results：The number of patients through radial artery who had local hematoma or wound hemorrhage and vascular complications vagus reflection after operation was distinctively lower than that of the patients through femoral artery（P0.05）,but higher in artery occlusion of the spasms and incidence（P0.01）;the number of lumbar and back pain,urinary retention,constipation,dressing and the average bedtime were much lower than femoral artery.Statistical significance difference was to learn（P0.05）.Conclusion：Radical coronary intervention can ease the discomfort and pain of the patients and make them feel more comfortable,and it can also reduce the nursing workload.