Comparative efficacy of negative pressure drainage technology and conventional dressing methods in the management of complex wounds
负压引流技术与常规换药方法在复杂伤口处理上的疗效对比

摘要

目的 探讨重症医学科负压引流技术与常规换药方法在复杂伤口处理中的疗效，并比较两种方法对于并发症发生率、护理依从率及患者护理满意度的影响。方法 选取某医院收治的50例复杂伤口患者作为研究对象，按照随机数字表法分为研究组和常规组，每组25例。研究组应用负压引流技术进行伤口处理，常规组则采用传统换药方法进行护理。比较两组患者的并发症发生率（出血、组织损伤、感染）和护理满意度（涉及护理安全、护理效果、操作技能及护理服务）。结果 在并发症方面，研究组的总并发症发生率为8.00%，显著低于常规组的32.00%，χ2值为4.500，P＜0.05，差异具有统计学意义；其中研究组组织损伤率为0.00%，出血和感染发生率分别为4.00%，显著优于常规组。在护理满意度方面，研究组患者的护理安全、护理效果、操作技能及护理服务评分均显著高于常规组（P＜0.05），具体表现为护理安全评分为90.21±2.75，护理效果评分为92.27±2.33，操作技能评分为91.56±2.42，护理服务评分为90.73±2.53。结论 重症医学科负压引流技术较常规换药方法在复杂伤口处理中的疗效显著，其不仅能有效降低患者并发症发生率，提高护理依从性，还能显著提升患者的护理满意度。负压引流技术在避免出血、减少组织损伤、控制感染等方面具有较大优势，值得在临床推广及应用。

Abstract

Objective To investigate the efficacy of negative pressure drainage technology and conventional dressing methods in the management of complex wounds in the intensive care unit, and to compare the impact of the two methods on the incidence of complications, nursing compliance, and patient satisfaction with nursing care.
Methods A total of 50 patients with complex wounds admitted to a hospital were selected as the research subjects and were randomly divided into the study group and the conventional group, with 25 cases in each group. The study group used negative pressure drainage technology for wound management, while the conventional group used traditional dressing methods. The incidence of complications (bleeding, tissue damage, infection) and nursing satisfaction(involving nursing safety, nursing effectiveness, operational skills, and nursing services)were compared between the two groups.
Results In terms of complications, the total incidence of complications in the study group was 8.00%,which was significantly lower than that of the conventional group at 32.00%,with a χ2 value of 4.500 and P<0.05,indicating a statistically significant difference. The incidence of tissue damage in the study group was 0.00%, while the incidence of bleeding and infection were 4.00%respectively, which were significantly better than those in the conventional group. Regarding nursing satisfaction, the scores for nursing safety, nursing effectiveness, operational skills, and nursing services in the study group were significantly higher than those in the conventional group(P<0.05),with specific scores of 90.21±2.75 for nursing safety, 92.27±2.33 for nursing effectiveness, 91.56±2.42 for operational skills, and 90.73±2.53 for nursing services.
Conclusion   Negative pressure drainage technology in the intensive care unit is significantly more effective than conventional dressing methods in the management of complex wounds. It can not only effectively reduce the incidence of complications in patients and improve nursing compliance, but also significantly enhance patient satisfaction with nursing care. Negative pressure drainage technology has significant advantages in preventing bleeding, reducing tissue damage, and controlling infection, and is worthy of promotion and application in clinical practice.