| 摘要: |
| 目的:比较静脉采血后不同按压方式患者的不良反应发生情况及其影响因素，以期指导患者正确按压采血部位，减少不良反应的发生。方法:采用分层、整群抽样的方法，抽取天津市南开医院医院门诊诊治的 400例患者，按采血后不同按压方式随机分为 3组，分别为棉签垂直按压并上臂弯曲组 123例、棉球按压并且上臂弯曲组 135例、输液贴按压并上臂弯曲组 142例，比较各组的不良反应发生情况，以及术后按压时间与出血或皮下瘀血发生率的关系。结果:采血后产生的不良反应有疼痛、紧张、针眼出血、皮下淤血或血肿。棉签垂直按压并且上臂弯曲组、棉球按压并且上臂弯曲组、输液贴按压并且上臂弯曲组的不良反应发生率分别为 79.67%、89.63%、83.10%，差异无统计学意义(χ 2=3.771，P=0.152)。不同按压时间下出血或皮下瘀血发生率的比较结果显示，按压时间越长，出血或皮下淤血发生率越少，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:门诊患者静脉采血后不良反应发生率均较高，不同按压方式下不良反应发生率无明显差异。需要加强对护士静脉采血知识的培训，以及对患者的健康教育。 |
| 关键词: 静脉采血 按压方式 不良反应 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1007-6948.2021.06.020 |
| 投稿时间：2021-01-15 |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Study on Different Compression Modes and Adverse Reactions after Venous Blood Collection CHEN |
| Zhuo,ZHUANG Yan |
| Outpatient Department, Tianjin Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, Tianjin 300100, China |
| Abstract: |
| Objective To understand the present situation and influencing factors of adverse reaction rate of outpatient patients after venous blood collection in Nankai Hospital of Tianjin, so as to improve the content of health education of venous blood collection. Guide patients to press the blood collection site correctly and reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions. Methods Strati.ed and cluster sampling method was used and 400 outpatients and 3 blood nurses were selected as the survey subjects. The data were analyzed to describe the incidence of adverse reactions. The ways and needs of patients and nurses attended to acquire knowledge about venous blood collection. The rate and composition ratio between groups by chi-square test were compared. The dichotomy Class Logistic (regression analysis of the in.uencing factors of adverse reactions) was used. Results The incidence of adverse reactions in outpatients after venous blood collection was 89.00%. There are three kinds of different pressing methods after 2 vein blood collection: cotton swab vertical pressing and upper arm bending, cotton ball pressing and upper arm bending, infusion pressing and upper arm stretching. The incidences of adverse reactions under each pressing mode were79.67%, 89.63% and 83.10% respectively. The adverse reactions were pain, tension, needle bleeding, subcutaneous congestion or hematoma. The incidence of adverse reactions was 82.00%. There was no signi.cant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions (χ2=3.771, P=0.152). Conclusion The incidences of adverse reactions under different compression were not statistically signi.cant. The incidences of adverse reactions after venous blood collection were high in outpatients. Most patients and nurses are willing to accept relevant knowledge of venous blood collection. It is necessary to strengthen the study of nurses’knowledge of venous blood collection and health education for patients. |
| Key words: Venous blood collection compression method adverse effects |
