| 高志赟.湿润烧伤膏治疗糖尿病足临床疗效观察[J].中国烧伤创疡杂志,2018,(3):157~161. |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 湿润烧伤膏 糖尿病足 碘伏 创面 疗效 |
| 英文关键词:MEBO Diabetic foot Iodophor Wounds Clinical efficacy |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2542 |
| 全文下载次数: 4857 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 【摘要】 目的 对比观察分别采用湿润烧伤膏换药与碘伏常规消毒治疗糖尿病足的临床疗效。方法 将2012年4月—2017年8月榆阳区鱼河峁镇卫生院烧伤整形科收治的80例糖尿病足患者随机分为研究组(40例)与对照组(40例), 其中研究组患者创面予以湿润烧伤膏换药治疗, 对照组患者创面予以碘伏常规消毒治疗, 对比观察两组患者的治疗总有效率、创面愈合时间、治疗前后炎症因子的表达水平及疼痛评分。结果 治疗15d时, 研究组患者的治疗总有效率为95.0%, 明显高于对照组患者的治疗总有效率80.0%, 两组对比采用四格表资料的卡方检验, χ2=4.114, P=0.044, P<0.05, 差异具有统计学意义; 研究组患者的创面愈合时间为(17.24 ±1.01)d, 明显短于对照组患者的创面愈合时间(24.13±2.75)d, 两组对比方差不齐,采用t'检验,t'=14.874, P<0.01, 差异具有统计学意义; 治疗后, 研究组患者体内的IL-6、WBC、CRP表达水平及创面疼痛评分均明显低于对照组, 两组对比方差不齐, 采用t '检验, t '值分别为2.303、9.190、15.153 及15.144,P均<0.05, 差异具有统计学意义。结论 湿润烧伤膏治疗糖尿病足, 可有效减轻创面组织的炎症反应程度, 缓解创面疼痛, 促进创面愈合, 疗效确切, 值得临床推广应用。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| 【Abstract】 Objective To observe and compare the clinical efficacies of the dressing change of Moist Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO) and the routine disinfection with iodophor in the treatment of diabetic foot. Methods Eighty diabetic foot patients admitted to the Burns and Plastic Surgery Department of Yuhemao Health Center between April 2012 and August 2017 were randomly divided into a study group (40cases) and a control group (40cases), in which, patients in the study group were treated with the dressing change of MEBO while patients in the control group were treated with the routine disinfection with iodophor. The total effective rate, wound healing time, expression level of inflammatory factors and pain scoring before and after treatment, in the two groups were observed and compared. Results On day 15 of the treatment,the total effective rate was 95.0% in the study group, being remarkably higher than 80.0% in the control group, of which the comparison showed statistically significant difference according to the Chi-square test of fourfold table (χ2=4.114, P=0.044, P<0.05). The wound healing time in the study group was (17.24±1.01)d, being obviously shorter than (24.13±2.75) d in the control group, and due to unequal variance, t' test was used for their comparison which showed statistically significant difference (t'=14.874, P<0.01). After the treatment, the expression levels of IL-6, WBC and CRP as well as the wound pain scores in patients of the study group were all lower than that in the control group, and due to unequal variances, t' test was used for their comparison which all showed statistically significant difference (t'=2.303, 9.190, 15.153 and 15.144 respectively, all P<0.05). Conclusion In the treatment of diabetic foot, MEBO can achieve definite clinical efficacies, such as effectively reduce the inflammatory response in wound tissues, alleviate wound pain and promote wound healing, deserving to be promoted in clinical practice. |
|
|
|
|
