检索历史 清除

目的：研究两种排便方式对悬浮床患者排便困难的影响,探讨适合于悬浮床患者的排便方式。方法将2012年使用悬浮床治疗的58例患者作为对照组,2013年使用悬浮床治疗的66例患者作为观察组,两组在相同的护理条件下,对照组采用传统排便方式,观察组采用改良排便方式,比较两组患者排便疼痛、时间、舒适度的情况。结果观察组排便时疼痛强度为无痛、轻度、中度、重度患者分别为48,11,7,0例,对照组分别为0,9,34,15例,两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=78.67,P <0.01)；观察组患者平均排便时间为(8.45±3.37)min,对照组为(13.26±5.68)min,两组比较差异有统计学意义(t =5.815,P <0.01)；观察组患者排便时感到不舒适为10例,对照组不舒适为54例,两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=75.113,P <0.01)。结论悬浮床患者排便时采用改良排便方式,疼痛强度较小,舒适度增加,患者易接受,可有效减少悬浮床患者排便困难的发生,提高护理质量。

Objective To study the influences of two kinds of defecation methods on difficult defecation and explore the suitable defecation method for patients on suspension bed. Methods A total of 58 patients who used suspension bed in 2012 were chosen as control group, while 66 patients used suspension bed in 2013 were selected as experimental group. Under the same nursing condition, the patients of control group took traditional method of defection while the patients of experimental group utilized the improved defection method. We compared the pain, time and comfort of defection. Results The patients with no pain, light pain, medium pain and sever pain in the experimental group were 48, 11, 7, 0 comparing with 0, 9, 34, 15 in the control group (χ2 = 78. 67,P < 0. 01). The average defection time was (8. 45 ± 3. 37) min in the experimental group and (13. 26 ± 5. 68) min in the control group (t = 5. 815,P < 0. 01); 10 cases felt discomfort of defection in the experimental group while 4 cases in the control group (χ2 = 75. 113,P < 0. 01). Conclusions Suspension bed patients use improved defection method which can promote defection method, comfort and patient′s acceptance, reduce the pain and the incidence of difficult defection, and improve quality of nursing.