摘要目的 观察两种不同方法 固定临时起搏器电极的效果.方法将2015年4月-12月我院80例安置临时起搏器患者随机分为对照组与试验组各40例,对照组采用传统的纱布联合布胶布十字交叉法固定,试验组采用3M舒适稳固型透明敷贴+3M加压固定带固定,比较两组在电极脱位、炎性反应、换药次数及费用方面的差异.结果 2组患者一般情况差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),具有可比性.两组患者在换药及材料费用、电极脱位方面差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),试验组的换药次数低于对照组(Z=-2.064,P<0.05),差异有统计学意义.结论 3M舒适稳固型透明敷贴+3M加压固定带法在不增加患者医疗费用的同时保障医疗安全,节约人力成本.

abstractsObjective To observe the effect of two different methods of fixed temporary pacemaker electrode. Methods Fromn April 2015 to December 80 temporary pacemaker patients were randomly divided into control group (n = 40) and the experimental group (n = 40), the control group using gauze cloth tape cross method combined with the traditional fixed, the experimental group was treated with 3M type of comfortable and stable transparent dressing+3M pressure fixing belt fixed, to compare two groups in the skin lesions, electrode dislocation, inflammatory reaction, the switching frequency difference. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in general data (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the cost of dressing and materials、electrode dislocation (P>0.05), experimental group of the switching frequency is lower than the control group (Z=-2.064, P<0.05), the differences were statistically significant. Conclusions 3M comfortable type solid transparent sticking and 3M pressurized fixed band method in the absence of increased medical costs while ensuring medical safety, save the manpower cost.