负压吸引联合局部氧疗治疗压疮效果的研究

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2018.01.009

目的

探讨负压吸引联合局部氧疗对压疮的治疗效果。

方法

将2015年1月至2016年12月于空军总医院烧伤整形科住院的60例Ⅲ期压疮患者按随机数字表法分为3组：常规换药组、负压吸引组、联合治疗组，每组各20例，常规换药组与负压吸引组分别给予常规换药法、负压伤口疗法治疗，联合治疗组采用负压吸引结合创面局部氧疗。观察入院后即刻，治疗后第1、2、3、4、5、6、7、8周创面最大长度、宽度、深度，渗出情况，组织类型及创面缩小程度。对数据进行单因素方差分析和LSD法。

结果

负压吸引组在压疮的长度、宽度、深度上较常规换药组均明显减小，联合治疗组的减小效果更为显著，差异均有统计学意义(P值均小于0.05)。治疗后第8周常规换药组压疮的长、宽、深度分别为(3.04±0.43)、(3.63±0.88)、(1.55±0.77) cm，负压吸引组分别为(2.14±0.71)、(2.65±1.27)、(1.05±0.62) cm，而联合治疗组为(1.17±0.28)、(1.39±2.37)、(0.58±0.45) cm。负压吸引组压疮的渗出明显减少，压疮肉芽组织生长明显增多，创面缩小程度更为显著，联合治疗组的以上治疗效果明显优于负压吸引组，差异均有统计学意义(P值均小于0.05)。

结论

负压吸引联合局部氧疗治疗Ⅲ期压疮能显著促进创面愈合，减少渗出，促进肉芽组织生长，效果优于单独负压吸引治疗，将来可以作为一种新的有效的治疗手段来推广应用。

关键词: 压力性溃疡, 负压伤口疗法, 氧, 伤口愈合

Objective

To study the effect of negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy on the treatment of pressure ulcers.

Methods

From January 2015 to December 2016, 60 patients with pressure ulcers over Ⅲ stage admitted in Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Air Force General Hospital, People′s Liberation Army, were divided into 3 groups according to the random number table method: conventional dressing change group, negative pressure wound therapy group and negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy group, 20 cases in each group. Conventional dressing change group and negative pressure wound therapy group were respectively given conventional dressing method, negative pressure wound treatment. Negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy group was given negative pressure to attract wounds with local oxygen therapy. Immediately after admission, at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th week after treatment, the maximum length, width, depth, exudation, tissue type and wound shrinkage were observed. Date were processed with analysis of variance and LSD test.

Results

The length, width and depth of pressure ulcers in the negative pressure wound therapy group were significantly decreased as compared to conventional dressing change group, while the decrease in negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy group was more significant, the differences were statistically significant (with P values below 0.05). The length, width and depth in conventional dressing group at the 8th week after treatment were (3.04±0.43), (3.63±0.88), and (1.55±0.77) cm, while in the negative pressure wound therapy group were (2.14±0.71), (2.65±1.27), and (1.05±0.62) cm, and in negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy group, there were (1.17±0.28), (1.39±2.37), and (0.58±0.45) cm. In the negative pressure wound therapy group, the exudation was reduced, the wound granulation tissue was increased, and the wound size was more reduced. All the above effect in the negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy group were obviously superior to negative pressure wound therapy group, the differences were statistically significant (with P values below 0.05).

Conclusion

Negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy can significantly promote wound healing, reduce exudation and promote the growth of granulation of pressure ulcers, it is better than the only use of negative pressure treatment, which can be applied as a new effective treatment method in the future.

Key words: Pressure ulcer, Negative-pressure wound therapy, Oxygen, Wound healing

表1 常规换药组、负压吸引组和联合治疗组创面长度、宽度、深度的变化(cm, ±s)

组别	例数	长度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药组	20	8.25±2.37	8.14±2.62	7.57±2.42	7.17±1.47	6.37±1.78
负压吸引组	20	8.37±2.34	8.11±2.57	7.43±2.12	7.05±2.38	6.28±2.14
联合治疗组	20	8.18±2.57	8.12±2.14	7.37±2.23	6.85±2.41	6.16±2.21
F值	?	0.0313	0.0008	0.0412	0.1150	0.0527
P值	?	0.9692	0.9992	0.9596	0.8916	0.9487
组别	例数	长度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	5.15±1.42	4.02±1.46	3.17±0.65	3.04±0.43
负压吸引组	20	4.82±1.36^a	3.71±1.04^a	2.84±0.49^a	2.14±0.71^a
联合治疗组	20	4.79±1.54^a	3.25±1.08^ab	2.14±0.68^ab	1.17±0.28^ab
F值	?	2.3838	5.0564	14.7538	68.3842
P值	?	0.0483	0.0183	<0.05	<0.05
组别	例数	宽度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	6.43±1.97	6.41±2.24	6.25±2.31	5.84±1.45	5.65±1.77
负压吸引组	20	6.26±1.85	6.22±2.15	6.09±2.33	5.77±1.48	5.45±1.69
联合治疗组	20	6.63±2.34	6.25±1.97	6.11±1.87	5.63±1.39	5.28±1.66
F值	?	0.1610	0.0463	0.0320	0.1102	0.2353
P值	?	0.8516	0.9548	0.9685	0.8958	0.7911
组别	例数	宽度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	5.37±1.42	4.95±2.07	4.31±1.28	3.63±0.88
负压吸引组	20	5.22±1.72	4.09±1.55^a	3.44±1.33^a	2.65±1.27^a
联合治疗组	20	4.15±1.22^ab	3.65±2.37^ab	2.33±2.37^ab	1.39±2.37^ab
F值	?	4.1091	2.4319	6.5484	9.4520
P值	?	0.0215	0.0480	0.0028	0.0003
组别	例数	深度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	4.57±2.28	4.46±2.11	4.18±2.15	4.02±1.67	3.78±1.38
负压吸引组	20	4.36±2.15	4.35±2.71	4.12±2.03	3.98±2.26	3.65±1.38
联合治疗组	20	4.58±1.76	4.46±2.35	4.19±2.58	3.73±2.38	3.59±1.42
F值	?	0.0717	0.0140	0.0056	0.1093	0.0972
P值	?	0.9309	0.9861	0.9944	0.8967	0.9076
组别	例数	深度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	3.35±2.07	2.75±1.32	2.26±1.12	1.55±0.77
负压吸引组	20	3.26±2.17	2.24±1.42^a	1.86±1.16^a	1.05±0.62^a
联合治疗组	20	2.75±1.23^ab	1.86±1.33^ab	1.37±0.63^ab	0.58±0.45^ab
F值	?	1.9879	3.1647	3.9781	11.9664
P值	?	0.0487	0.0341	0.0241	<0.05

表1 常规换药组、负压吸引组和联合治疗组创面长度、宽度、深度的变化(cm, ±s)

组别	例数	长度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药组	20	8.25±2.37	8.14±2.62	7.57±2.42	7.17±1.47	6.37±1.78
负压吸引组	20	8.37±2.34	8.11±2.57	7.43±2.12	7.05±2.38	6.28±2.14
联合治疗组	20	8.18±2.57	8.12±2.14	7.37±2.23	6.85±2.41	6.16±2.21
F值	?	0.0313	0.0008	0.0412	0.1150	0.0527
P值	?	0.9692	0.9992	0.9596	0.8916	0.9487
组别	例数	长度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	5.15±1.42	4.02±1.46	3.17±0.65	3.04±0.43
负压吸引组	20	4.82±1.36^a	3.71±1.04^a	2.84±0.49^a	2.14±0.71^a
联合治疗组	20	4.79±1.54^a	3.25±1.08^ab	2.14±0.68^ab	1.17±0.28^ab
F值	?	2.3838	5.0564	14.7538	68.3842
P值	?	0.0483	0.0183	<0.05	<0.05
组别	例数	宽度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	6.43±1.97	6.41±2.24	6.25±2.31	5.84±1.45	5.65±1.77
负压吸引组	20	6.26±1.85	6.22±2.15	6.09±2.33	5.77±1.48	5.45±1.69
联合治疗组	20	6.63±2.34	6.25±1.97	6.11±1.87	5.63±1.39	5.28±1.66
F值	?	0.1610	0.0463	0.0320	0.1102	0.2353
P值	?	0.8516	0.9548	0.9685	0.8958	0.7911
组别	例数	宽度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	5.37±1.42	4.95±2.07	4.31±1.28	3.63±0.88
负压吸引组	20	5.22±1.72	4.09±1.55^a	3.44±1.33^a	2.65±1.27^a
联合治疗组	20	4.15±1.22^ab	3.65±2.37^ab	2.33±2.37^ab	1.39±2.37^ab
F值	?	4.1091	2.4319	6.5484	9.4520
P值	?	0.0215	0.0480	0.0028	0.0003
组别	例数	深度
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	4.57±2.28	4.46±2.11	4.18±2.15	4.02±1.67	3.78±1.38
负压吸引组	20	4.36±2.15	4.35±2.71	4.12±2.03	3.98±2.26	3.65±1.38
联合治疗组	20	4.58±1.76	4.46±2.35	4.19±2.58	3.73±2.38	3.59±1.42
F值	?	0.0717	0.0140	0.0056	0.1093	0.0972
P值	?	0.9309	0.9861	0.9944	0.8967	0.9076
组别	例数	深度
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	3.35±2.07	2.75±1.32	2.26±1.12	1.55±0.77
负压吸引组	20	3.26±2.17	2.24±1.42^a	1.86±1.16^a	1.05±0.62^a
联合治疗组	20	2.75±1.23^ab	1.86±1.33^ab	1.37±0.63^ab	0.58±0.45^ab
F值	?	1.9879	3.1647	3.9781	11.9664
P值	?	0.0487	0.0341	0.0241	<0.05

表2 常规换药组、负压吸引组和联合治疗组创面渗出情况和组织类型评分的变化(分，±s)

组别	例数	渗出情况
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	2.96±0.37	2.63±0.61	2.32±0.41	2.17±0.62	1.97±0.38
负压吸引组	20	3.00±0.00	2.71±0.57	2.26±0.52	1.81±0.38^a	1.63±0.24^a
联合治疗组	20	2.93±0.26	2.69±0.44	2.31±0.33	1.85±0.42^a	1.56±0.31^a
F值	?	0.3619	0.1168	0.1133	3.3125	9.6813
P值	?	0.6980	0.8900	0.8931	0.0436	0.0002
组别	例数	渗出情况
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	1.63±0.43	1.42±0.48	1.27±0.45	1.05±0.47
负压吸引组	20	1.15±0.47^a	1.03±0.26^a	0.91±0.62^a	0.74±0.69^a
联合治疗组	20	1.21±0.52^a	0.82±0.25^ab	0.54±0.73^ab	0.27±0.52^ab
F值	?	6.0692	15.4286	7.1388	9.5658
P值	?	0.0041	0.0000	0.0017	0.0003
组别	例数	组织类型
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	3.00±0.00	2.92±1.04	2.75±0.81	2.53±1.12	2.36±0.78
负压吸引组	20	2.96±1.61	2.94±0.76	2.79±0.63	2.61±0.42	2.05±0.29^a
联合治疗组	20	3.00±0.00	2.87±0.47	2.71±0.87	2.57±0.49	1.98±0.62^a
F值	?	0.0123	0.0415	0.0530	0.0575	2.4188
P值	?	0.9877	0.9594	0.9484	0.9442	0.0478
组别	例数	组织类型
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	2.21±0.43	2.18±0.37	2.01±0.48	1.92±0.68
负压吸引组	20	1.92±0.52^a	1.79±0.56^a	1.64±0.62^a	1.55±1.27^a
联合治疗组	20	1.63±0.22^ab	1.51±0.41^ab	1.32±0.38^ab	1.12±2.37^ab
F值	?	10.0179	10.9829	9.4231	5.2504
P值	?	0.0002	0.0001	0.0003	0.0091

表2 常规换药组、负压吸引组和联合治疗组创面渗出情况和组织类型评分的变化(分，±s)

组别	例数	渗出情况
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	2.96±0.37	2.63±0.61	2.32±0.41	2.17±0.62	1.97±0.38
负压吸引组	20	3.00±0.00	2.71±0.57	2.26±0.52	1.81±0.38^a	1.63±0.24^a
联合治疗组	20	2.93±0.26	2.69±0.44	2.31±0.33	1.85±0.42^a	1.56±0.31^a
F值	?	0.3619	0.1168	0.1133	3.3125	9.6813
P值	?	0.6980	0.8900	0.8931	0.0436	0.0002
组别	例数	渗出情况
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	1.63±0.43	1.42±0.48	1.27±0.45	1.05±0.47
负压吸引组	20	1.15±0.47^a	1.03±0.26^a	0.91±0.62^a	0.74±0.69^a
联合治疗组	20	1.21±0.52^a	0.82±0.25^ab	0.54±0.73^ab	0.27±0.52^ab
F值	?	6.0692	15.4286	7.1388	9.5658
P值	?	0.0041	0.0000	0.0017	0.0003
组别	例数	组织类型
组别	例数	入院后即刻	治疗后1周	治疗后2周	治疗后3周	治疗后4周
常规换药祖	20	3.00±0.00	2.92±1.04	2.75±0.81	2.53±1.12	2.36±0.78
负压吸引组	20	2.96±1.61	2.94±0.76	2.79±0.63	2.61±0.42	2.05±0.29^a
联合治疗组	20	3.00±0.00	2.87±0.47	2.71±0.87	2.57±0.49	1.98±0.62^a
F值	?	0.0123	0.0415	0.0530	0.0575	2.4188
P值	?	0.9877	0.9594	0.9484	0.9442	0.0478
组别	例数	组织类型
组别	例数	治疗后5周	治疗后6周	治疗后7周	治疗后8周
常规换药祖	20	2.21±0.43	2.18±0.37	2.01±0.48	1.92±0.68
负压吸引组	20	1.92±0.52^a	1.79±0.56^a	1.64±0.62^a	1.55±1.27^a
联合治疗组	20	1.63±0.22^ab	1.51±0.41^ab	1.32±0.38^ab	1.12±2.37^ab
F值	?	10.0179	10.9829	9.4231	5.2504
P值	?	0.0002	0.0001	0.0003	0.0091

图1 常规换药组、负压吸引组及联合治疗组入院后即刻、治疗后1、2、3、4、5、6、7、8周创面体积变化。^a示与常规换药组比较，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；^b示与负压吸引组比较，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)

[1]	Tran JP, McLaughlin JM, Li RT, et al. Prevention of Pressure Ulcers in the Acute Care Setting: New Innovations and Technologies[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2016, 138(3 Suppl):232S-240S.
[2]	金新源，谢尔凡. 压疮的评估、预防和治疗研究进展[J/CD]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2014, 9(2):189-194.
[3]	Cannon BC, Cannon JP. Management of pressure ulcers[J]. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2004, 61(18):1895-1905; quize 1906-1907.
[4]	Stansby G, Avital L, Jones K, et al. Prevention and management of pressure ulcers in primary and secondary care: summary of NICE guidance[J]. BMJ, 2014, 348:g2592.
[5]	陈茜. 压疮的评估、预防及治疗进展[J]. 现代临床医学，2014, 40(6):460-462.
[6]	Dumville JC, Webster J, Evans D, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for treating pressure ulcers[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015, (5):CD011334.
[7]	Kuffler DP. Improving the ability to eliminate wounds and pressure ulcers[J]. Wound Repair Regen, 2015, 23(3):312-317.
[8]	McInnes E, Jammali-Blasi A, Bell-Syer SE, et al. Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015, (9):CD001735.
[9]	Ricci JA, Bayer LR, Orgill DP. Evidence-Based Medicine: The Evaluation and Treatment of Pressure Injuries[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017, 139(1):275e-286e.
[10]	Bradley M, Cullum N, Nelson EA, et al. Systematic reviews of wound care management: (2). Dressings and topical agents used in the healing of chronic wounds[J]. Health Technol Assess 1999, 3(17 Pt 2):1-35.
[11]	Wirsing PG, Habrom AD, Zehnder TM, et al. Wireless micro current stimulation--an innovative electrical stimulation method for the treatment of patients with leg and diabetic foot ulcers[J]. Int wound J, 2015, 12(6):693-698.
[12]	Min PK, Goo BL. 830 nm light-emitting diode low level light therapy (LED-LLLT) enhances wound healing: a preliminary study[J]. Laser Ther, 2013, 22(1):43-49.
[13]	Dwivedi MK, Srivastava RN, Bhagat AK, et al. Pressure ulcer management in paraplegic patients with a novel negative pressure device: a randomised controlled trial[J]. J Wound Care, 2016, 25(4):199-200, 202-204, 206-207.
[14]	Suissa D, Danino A, Nikolis A. Negative-pressure therapy versus standard wound care: a meta-analysis of randomized trials[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2011, 128(5):498e-503e.
[15]	Gregor S, Maegele M, Sauerland S, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy: a vacuum of evidence？[J]. Arch Surg, 2008, 143(2):189-196.
[16]	Dissemond J, Kroger K, Storck M, et al. Topical oxygen wound therapies for chronic wounds: a review[J]. J Wound Care, 2015, 24(2):53-54, 56-60, 62-63.
[17]	Schreml S, Szeimies RM, Prantl L, et al. Oxygen in acute and chronic wound healing[J]. Br J Dermatol, 2010, 163(2):257-268.
[18]	Said HK, Hijjawi J, Roy N, et al. Transdermal sustained-delivery oxygen improves epithelial healing in a rabbit ear wound model[J]. Arch Surg, 2005, 140(10):998-1004.
[19]	Hirsh F, Berlin SJ, Holtz A. Transdermal oxygen delivery to diabetic wounds: a report of 6 cases[J]. Adv Skin Wound Care, 2009, 22(1):20-24.
[20]	Woo KY, Coutts PM, Sibbald RG. Continuous topical oxygen for the treatment of chronic wounds: a pilot study[J]. Adv Skin Wound Care, 2012, 25(12):543-547.
[21]	Banks PG, Ho CH. A novel topical oxygen treatment for chronic and difficult-to-heal wounds: case studies[J]. J Spinal Cord Med, 2008, 31(3):297-301.

[1]	周子慧, 李恭驰, 李炳辉, 王知, 刘慧真, 王卉, 邹利军. 细胞自噬在创面愈合中作用的研究进展[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 542-546.
[2]	陈继秋, 朱世辉. 皮肤牵张装置的临床应用现状[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 451-453.
[3]	张小曼, 马筱秋, 许正锯, 张纯瑜, 何彩婷. 乙型肝炎病毒逆转录酶区耐药突变对血清乙型肝炎病毒表面抗原水平的影响[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 324-332.
[4]	王得晨, 杨康, 杨自杰, 归明彬, 屈莲平, 张小凤, 高峰. 结直肠癌微卫星稳定状态和程序性死亡、吲哚胺2,3-双加氧酶关系的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 462-465.
[5]	潘玮瑄, 郝少龙, 韩威. 低氧微环境与实体恶性肿瘤m⁶A修饰的研究进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 461-464.
[6]	刘骏, 朱霁, 殷骏. 右美托咪定对腹股沟疝手术麻醉效果及安全性的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 570-573.
[7]	汪俊谷, 潘华琴, 杨雨田. HFNC治疗急性低氧性呼吸衰竭插管预后及影响因素分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 523-525.
[8]	刘佳铭, 孙晓容, 文健, 何晓丽, 任茂玲. 有氧运动对成人哮喘肺功能、生活质量以及哮喘控制影响的Meta分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 592-595.
[9]	孙文琦, 吴欣荣, 王运荣, 赵贝, 窦晓坛, 李雯, 邹晓平, 王雷, 陈敏. 结直肠上皮细胞ROS及FH检测对结直肠癌筛查的应用价值[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 326-330.
[10]	张瑞琪, 张丽娟, 孙斌. 甲状腺相关性眼病表观遗传学的研究进展[J]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 226-230.
[11]	尚慧娟, 袁晓冬. 机械取栓术后应用依达拉奉右崁醇对急性缺血性脑卒中预后的改善[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 295-301.
[12]	邹勇, 顾应江, 丁昊, 杨呈浩, 陈岷辉, 蔡昱. 基于Nrf2/HO-1及NF-κB信号通路探讨葛根素对大鼠脑出血后早期炎症反应及氧化应激反应的影响[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 271-277.
[13]	张敏洁, 张小杉, 段莎莎, 施依璐, 赵捷, 白天昊, 王雅晳. 氢气治疗心肌缺血再灌注损伤的作用机制及展望[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 744-748.
[14]	李变, 王莉娜, 桑田, 李珊, 杜雪燕, 李春华, 张兴云, 管巧, 王颖, 冯琪, 蒙景雯. 亚低温技术治疗缺氧缺血性脑病新生儿的临床分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 639-643.
[15]	刘感哲, 艾芬. MiRNA-210通过抑制HIF-1α的表达改善大鼠血管性认知功能障碍[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 489-494.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Effect of negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy on the treatment of pressure ulcers

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Effect of negative pressure wound therapy combined with local oxygen therapy on the treatment of pressure ulcers