摘要
目的 探讨手臂输液港与胸壁输液港用于老年妇科化疗患者的安全性差异。方法 选取我院2015年4月至2016年9月80例老年妇科肿瘤化疗患者为研究对象,依据输液港置入部位将其等分为手臂组和胸壁组,两组均实施常规妇科肿瘤护理,同时手臂组采用手臂输液港,胸壁组采用胸壁输液港。比较两组患者不良事件(感染、导管堵塞、血栓)及缓解时间、癌因性疲乏程度(癌因性疲乏评分)。结果 手臂组并发症发生率及缓解时间低于胸壁组(P<0.05);手臂组患者癌因性疲乏评分显著低于胸壁组(P<0.05)。结论 手臂输液港较胸壁输液港用于老年妇科肿瘤化疗患者具有降低感染、导管堵塞及血栓发生风险,缓解时间更短,同时能够降低癌因性疲乏程度的效果,在护理过程中应首选手臂输液港。
Objective To explore the safety difference of arm infusion port and chest wall infusion port in elderly patients with gynecological chemotherapy. Methods To select 80 elderly patients with gynecologic tumor chemotherapy in our hospital from April 2015 to September 2016 as the study subjects. According to the placement site of the infusion port, they were divided into the arm group and the chest wall group. Both groups were treated with routine gynecological tumor nursing. The arm group was given the arm infusion port, while the chest wall group was given the chest wall infusion port. We compared adverse events (such as infection, catheter blockage, and thrombus), time of remission and the degree of cancer-related fatigue (such as cancer-related fatigue score) between the two groups. Results The incidence of complications and time of remission in the arm group were significantly lower than those in the chest wall group( P <0.05).The score of cancer-related fatigue in the arm group was significantly lower than that in the chest wall group( P <0.05). Conclusion Compared with the chest wall infusion port, the arm infusion port is better for elderly patients with gynecologic cancer chemotherapy, which can reduce infection, catheter blockage and thrombosis. Meanwhile, the remission time is shorter, and it also can reduce degree of cancer-induced fatigue. So, we can select arm infusion port during the nursing process.
出处
《护理实践与研究》
2019年第13期7-9,共3页
Nursing Practice and Research
关键词
手臂输液港
胸壁输液港
老年
化疗
安全性
Arm infusion port
Chest wall infusion port
Elderly
Chemotherapy
Safety
